SMF Tie Cable Standards for Data Center Applications

In our new data center builds we're transitioning from MMF to SMF for the tie cabling between networking gear in the MDF/IDF racks to the server racks. Today those interconnects are short (under 100 meters) 10GE and 40GE-LX4 over MMF. We’re transitioning to SMF to support services beyond that, such

Building a technical library

Looking to develop a technical library for about 15 staff members all under the same roof. Subject matter would focus around Juniper/Junos, TCP/IP, dwdm, python, java, and expand from there. The O'reilly Safari service looks rather comprehensive, although at $400/user there may be more value buyi

eBGP Graceful-Restart and GR Helper Mode with external networks.

Is there a BCOP (or substantiated opinion) for negotiating eBGP Graceful-Restart and Graceful-Restart Helper-Mode with external networks? Implementation looks varied across a few larger transit providers, and in some cases implemented inconsistently within the same provider. Seeing most IX peers w

Pad 1310nm cross-connects?

What are the opinions/views on attenuating short, 1310nm LR cross-connects. Assume < 20m cable length and utilizing the same vendor optics on each side of the link. Considering the LR transmit spec doesn't exceed the receiver's high threshold value do you pad the receiver closer to the median RX

Looking for a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact

Hoping to speak with a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) engineer regarding routing in Illinois region towards Gaikai (AS33353). Thanks, Chris Costa

Re: Looking for a Consolidated Communications (AS5742) contact

Oops, sorry. Didn't think those other requests got through the moderator. :) On Feb 6, 2015 6:18 PM, "Mike Hammett" wrote: > Yeah, but it's the same guy looking for the same people for the same > issue. I know it sucks to have things not working right, but they're > probably not here. > > > > > -

Re: Using /31 for router links

We recently did a backbone router upgrade and the vendor surprisingly didn't support /31's. We had to renumber all those interconnects and peering sessions to /30's. That wasn't fun! On Jan 22, 2010, at 4:53 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: Joe Provo wrote: On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 04:08:28PM -0

Re: Peering Exchange Configurations

at joined them. Chris -- Chris Costa CENIC cco...@cenic.org On Apr 8, 2010, at 9:29 AM, Joe Abley wrote: 4) Do exchanges typically support the following address families? IPv4 Multicast IPv6 Unicast IPv6 Multicast