Well,
I was just a suit drone into one of their 100 little IT firm around
the world.
The nearest I got to an actual AA associate was during a 1 month
project in Chicago (:
Wasted my time really... They billed 3 months to their clients, for
a project that took 1 month, and I was
Hey There,
I was just wondering, for people who are doing netflow analysis with
open source tools and who are doing at least 10k or more flows per
second, what are you using?
I know of three tool sets:
- The classic osu flow-tools and the modern continuation/fork.
- ntop
- nfdump/nfsen
Is
On May 2, 2014, at 9:36 PM, Matthew Galgoci mgalg...@redhat.com wrote:
A few folks here really seem to like
nfsen/nfdump.
The good thing about nfdump/nfsen is that you can customize it and do a lot
with it, and it's easy to get set up and running.
This is the canonical list of open-source
On 2014-05-02 16:36, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
[..]
Is there anything else I've missed? A few folks here really seem to like
nfsen/nfdump.
For OSS that is pretty much it that really matters (maybe you could add
Argus if you really want though).
For a long long list, check out Simon Leinen's site:
There's also SiLK from CMU. It's powerful but has a learning curve.
I also see pmacct being used both by some end networks and by
some vendors as part of systems.
Avi
Hey There,
I was just wondering, for people who are doing netflow analysis with
open source tools and who are doing at
pmacct (http://www.pmacct.net/) is another pretty awesome open source tool.
Leslie
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Avi Freedman freed...@freedman.net wrote:
There's also SiLK from CMU. It's powerful but has a learning curve.
I also see pmacct being used both by some end networks and by
NANOG nanog-bounces+jloiacon=csc@nanog.org wrote on 05/02/2014
11:00:15 AM:
From: freed...@freedman.net (Avi Freedman)
There's also SiLK from CMU. It's powerful but has a learning curve.
SiLK is very good. See FlowViewer for a powerful front-end to the tool.
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG,
TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group.
Daily listings are sent to
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between them? Or
is it better to put v4 in the v6 session or v6 in the v4 session?
According to docs, obviously all of these are supported and if both sides
On May 2, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Deepak Jain dee...@ai.net wrote:
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between them?
Or is it better to put v4 in the v6 session or v6 in the v4 session?
We use
Two different sessions using two different transport protocols. The v4 BGP
session should have address family v6 disabled and vice versa. Exchange v4
routes over a v4 TCP connection, exchange v6 routes over a v6 TCP connection.
Just treat them as independent protocols.
-Laszlo
On May 2,
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between them?
Or is it better to put v4 in the v6 session or v6 in the v4 session?
According to docs, obviously all of these are supported and if both
Subject: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack) Date: Fri, May 02, 2014 at
07:44:33PM + Quoting Deepak Jain (dee...@ai.net):
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between them?
Or is it
Hi Mans,
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Måns Nilsson mansa...@besserwisser.orgwrote:
This is a field where v4 next-hops are essential to make things
work. rantIn that context, allocating 100.64.0.0/10 to CGN was
especially un-clever... /rant
Would you expound a bit on what you mean here? I
This report has been generated at Fri May 2 21:13:55 2014 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/2.0 for a current version of this report.
Recent Table History
BGP Update Report
Interval: 24-Apr-14 -to- 01-May-14 (7 days)
Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072
TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS
Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name
1 - AS7029 179743 8.1% 788.3 -- WINDSTREAM - Windstream
Communications Inc,US
2 - AS9829
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
On May 2, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Deepak Jain dee...@ai.net wrote:
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between
them?
2014-05-02 16:36 GMT+02:00 Matthew Galgoci mgalg...@redhat.com:
Hey There,
I was just wondering, for people who are doing netflow analysis with
open source tools and who are doing at least 10k or more flows per
second, what are you using?
I know of three tool sets:
- The classic osu
On May 2, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Deepak Jain dee...@ai.net wrote:
Between peering routers on a dual-stacked network, is it considered best
practices to have two BGP sessions (one for v4 and one for v6) between them?
Or is it better to put v4 in the v6 session or v6 in the v4 session?
I need a sanity check.
An incumbent in Canada has revealed that its voice service on FTTP
deployments is based on H.248 MEGACO (Media Gateway Controller).
Are there any examples of CLEC access to such FTTP deployments ?
(for instance, an area where the copper was removed, leaving only fibre
to
20 matches
Mail list logo
