On 18/Jun/20 07:25, Saku Ytti wrote:
> The IGP mess we are in is horrible, but I can't blame SR for it. It's
> really unacceptable we spend NRE hours developing 3 identical IGP
> (OSPFv2, OSPFv3, ISIS). We all pay a 300-400% premium for a single
> IGP.
>
> In a sane world, we'd retire all of th
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 10:13, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Which is great for you, me, and a ton of other folk that run IS-IS on
> Juniper. What about folk that don't have Juniper, or run OSPF?
>
> I know, not your or my problem, but the Internet isn't just a few networks.
Yes work left to be done. Ultim
On 18/Jun/20 09:30, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Yes work left to be done. Ultimately the root problem is, no one cares
> about IPv6. But perhaps work with vendors in parallel to LDPv6 to get
> them to fix OSPFv3 and/or ISIS.
Yes, this.
Vendor feedback for those not supporting LDPv6 is that there is no
Musa Stephen Honlue wrote on 18/06/2020 03:38:
Did you face any issues with IPv6 on 6.4, I personally have participated
in deployment projects on Mikrotik for many large networks.
mikrotik ROS6 doesn't support next-hop recursion for ipv6 routes:
https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php
> From: Saku Ytti
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 6:26 AM
>
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 01:17, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> > Yes, we all love less state, I won't argue that. But it's the same question
> that is being asked less and less with each passing year - what scales better
> in
> 2020, OSPF or IS
On 17/Jun/20 19:19, Job Snijders wrote:
>
> Our hero Massimiliano Stucchi in Switzerland started doing the legwork.
> He is is sharing the test results here:
>
> http://as58280.net/en/articles/RPKI-on-Mikrotik
>
> Enjoy!
Thanks, and great to see.
Shame IPv6 keeps being sent to the naughty
On 17/Jun/20 20:31, Bryan Fields wrote:
>
>
> How is IPv6 coming on Mikrotik? It's a no-go at least for my
> deployment on
> 6.4 code. Not sure I want to run beta in a quasi-production network.
In my home, basic IPv6 + SLAAC is working fine on Mikrotik, on 6.47.
I have a mate who adds DHCP-
On 17/Jun/20 21:16, Tim Warnock wrote:
> How did you know? Is there some monitoring system available to let you know
> or do you have your own?
The usual way - a customer complained :-).
Mark.
On 17/Jun/20 22:47, Dovid Bender wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My 9-5 is working for a VoIP provider. When we started in 2006 we had
> a lot of issues with the quality of the internet in eastern europe and
> central Asia. It was not rare for us to have to play around with
> routing to get the quality that we
On 18/Jun/20 00:50, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement
> contracts, which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to
> take a new, much larger/better model as a replacement.
It's one of the reasons we never pay for 24/7/365.
In many
Hi Saku,
To your IGP point let me observe that OSPF runs over IP and ISIS does not.
That is first fundamental difference. There are customers using both all
over the world and therefore any suggestion to just use OSPFv3 is IMHO
quite unrealistic. Keep in mind that OSPF hierarchy is 2 (or 3 with su
On 18/Jun/20 04:00, Owen DeLong wrote:
> OTOH, I bet if you’d had two of those cards fail, you might
> have been SOL on the second one for a couple of days.
Quite possibly, who knows :-). Perhaps I should ask them, just to get a
squirm :-).
Then again, we had enough redundancy built into the
On 18/Jun/20 12:28, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> To your IGP point let me observe that OSPF runs over IP and ISIS does
> not. That is first fundamental difference. There are customers using
> both all over the world and therefore any suggestion to just use
> OSPFv3 is IMHO quite unrealistic.
Are you
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 13:28, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> To your IGP point let me observe that OSPF runs over IP and ISIS does not.
> That is first fundamental difference. There are customers using both all over
> the world and therefore any suggestion to just use OSPFv3 is IMHO quite
> unrealisti
Mark Tinka wrote on 18/06/2020 11:16:
On 17/Jun/20 21:16, Tim Warnock wrote:
How did you know? Is there some monitoring system available to let
you know or do you have your own?
The usual way - a customer complained :-).
The customer monitoring system is very reliable and often superior to
i
On 18/Jun/20 12:51, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> The customer monitoring system is very reliable and often superior to
> in-house solutions.
What really made the experience great for us is that directly contacting
the remote network (somewhere in Eastern Europe) and getting them to fix
the issue
On 16/06/2020 22:08, J. Hellenthal via
NANOG wrote:
This issue was raised in Reddit and
Github:
https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/h149em/calls_to_replace_blacklist_whitelist_black_hat/
https://www.techspot.com/news/85631-github-replace-terms-whi
> From: NANOG On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 8:13 AM
>
> There are probably as many networks running SR-MPLS as there are running
> LDPv6, likely fewer if your SR deployment doesn't yet support OSPFv3 or SR-
> ISISv6. I concede that for some networks looking to go SR-MPLS
Mark Tinka wrote on 18/06/2020 11:56:
Invalid routes being dropped creates downtime. People respond to
downtime a lot more eagerly.
humanity is a crisis-driven species.
Nick
On 18/Jun/20 13:23, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> You do have the LDP vs SR choice (in v4 anyways) yes there's not a good 1:1
> feature parity with v6, but the important point...
But the lack of IPv4/IPv6 parity is a crucial one.
There is only so long we can stretch IPv4, if one can
> I think, on the whole, as current-production routers have migrated away
> from software-based forwarding in recent years into hardware planes, as
ACK. Good Internet is almost an emergent feature, not something we
really designed for. The main remaining problems are congested
peerings, which is a
> From: Mark Tinka
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:51 PM
>
> On 18/Jun/20 13:23, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
>
> > is the current state is not the end state, this is a pretty dynamic
> > industry
> that I'm sure is converging/evolving towards a v4:v6 parity, however the pace
> may b
Hello ...
If anyone from Microsoft peering is lurking, I could use an assist.
We have a reachability issue in Chicago.
E-mail to their PeeringDB NOC contact have gone unanswered.
Thank you!
On 18/Jun/20 14:28, Saku Ytti wrote:
> ACK. Good Internet is almost an emergent feature, not something we
> really designed for. The main remaining problems are congested
> peerings, which is a silly political problem which ends up hurting
> customers and not helping anyone.
It's easier to ke
> On Jun 18, 2020, at 2:28 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> No one needs strict priority queues anymore, which was absolutely
> needed at one point in time.
What time was that?
-Bill
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
This link will take you to their "suggest a feature" section.
https://help.mikrotik.com/servicedesk/customer/portal/1/create/6
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Brya
Hi,
in our region (CIS, eastern Europe) we still have issues
with overloaded international transport and bad quality of international
channels from time to time (especially at the beginning of COVID19).
While Internet looks slow, but still usable, this case VoIP goes really bad.
Our regional
On 18/Jun/20 14:30, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> Hence our current strategy is to stay on IPv4 control-plane (and IPv4
> management plane) as it suits, and for the foreseeable future will suite, all
> our needs (which are to transport v4&v6 data packets via L2&L3 MPLS VPN
> services
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 15:49, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> > On Jun 18, 2020, at 2:28 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> > No one needs strict priority queues anymore, which was absolutely
> > needed at one point in time.
>
> What time was that?
Somewhere between 2000..2005 I personally still delivered customer
On 18/Jun/20 14:49, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> What time was that?
Back when a 12000 GSR chassis had one line card in slot 0 for the public
Internet, and another in slot 5 for the MPLS backbone. They had to be
that far apart, for safety :-)...
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital si
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:26 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
> On 18/Jun/20 00:50, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
>
> A number of customers (myself included) had 4 hour replacement contracts,
> which the vendor really could not meet - so we agreed to take a new, much
> larger/better model as a replacement.
>
On 18/Jun/20 14:56, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Somewhere between 2000..2005 I personally still delivered customer
> connections that needed that. But we were providing 64kbps still to
> some odd locations, like paper mill in the middle of nowhere. I also
> needed to do MLPPP over 2*64kbps so that seria
On 18/Jun/20 15:26, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Ah, because, if you word / negotiate your contract carefully, the
> failure to meet the 24/7 SLO can be converted into credit -- either
> actual discounts or simply a big stick when negotiating new stuff.
> Many years ago I worked for a company who rep
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 4:15 PM Dovid Bender wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am sorry if this is off topic.I was once demoed a network device that had
> two interfaces. The traffic would go through the device. If there was a power
> cut or some other malfunction there would be a relay that would physically
For safety!
Reminds me of bonding channels in an ISDN line. We had to keep them all
apart.
For their own protection.
-Ben
> On Jun 18, 2020, at 6:18 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 18/Jun/20 14:49, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>>
>> What time was that?
>
> Back when a 12000 GSR chassis had
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 1:15 PM Dovid Bender wrote:
> I am sorry if this is off topic.I was once demoed a network device
> that had two interfaces. The traffic would go through the device.
> If there was a power cut or some other malfunction there would be
> a relay that would physically bridge th
Mike,
>As our canned Email stated, AS2 (and many low digit AS') get hijacked and
>often go on to hijack someone's prefix. AS2 (proper) is rarely changed and
>the chances of an actual prefix hijack from it is extremely low.
>
>So as I've asked our peers, I'll ask here: What is expected of us to be
37 matches
Mail list logo
