January 2013 - NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Looking for success stories in Qwest/Centurylink land
by Joe Maimon 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Anybody have some happy success stories to share about service in Qwest service area post Centurylink acquisition? Unfortunately the ones I have contain more humor than success. Story #1 Ethernet/Fiber service near Tampa ordered via partner, misordered as MPLS, re-ordered as vpls. Delivered by June, I have been trying unsuccessfully to get a MAC off the NID ever since. Similarly, I have been unsuccessful in getting the LEC onsite to troubleshoot the NID. My last update was a due date of 2/22, after they missed a 1/17 date. Nope, not a typo. Story #2 Ethernet/Fiber service in Phoenix ordered via partner. Apparently, in order to save on the expense of the NID/switch combo, the LEC ran the second set of fiber strands up to an existing customer in the building, using dedicated conduit from the building dmarc (which is accessible by our customer). They then instructed us to run copper back from their customer back to our customer's space. This recipient of the new fiber refused permission (not to mention being unhappy at unwittingly providing shared service). LEC claims the order was marked closed and delivered and any changes are new orders that will take 45 days. There has not been an update since, although presumably, we are on the 45 day clock. Due on the 1st, delivered in mid December, this is a month late with no timely resolution in sight. I have been assured by everyone involved that escalation has been pursued to the highest levels, including pleading with the CEO of the unwitting service providing customer, to no avail. If someone from Centurylink who can make things happen and be privy to the real dealings would please reach out directly to me, I have high hopes that there can be happy endings for these stories. Or if anybody has any useful suggestions, ideas, advice, or even commiserations, all are welcome to share. Best, Joe

14 21

Ethernet Service at 150 S. Market Street, SJ
by Christopher Nielsen 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Hello, We're in need of low-bandwidth ethernet service in our cage at Datapipe at 150 S. Market Street for OOB. Any recommendations? TIA -- Christopher Nielsen "They who can give up essential liberty for temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson

5 7

MessageLabs/MXLogic issues
by Thomas York 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

Have any of you noticed issued delivering email through MessageLabs to people who use MXLogic for spam/AV filtering? I've seen it more and more over the last month, to the point that I have to call 5-10 people a day to tell them to whitelist our domain in MXLogic. It isn't specific to a certain domain, just to Symantec/MessageLabs IPs. I've also seen this issue once or twice with domains hosted with Gmail, but those have cleared themselves up. -- Thomas York

2 1

RE: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC
by Summers, William 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

We use IBM networking (used to be BLADE networks) Rackswitch 8264. They will do TRILL, and have multi-chassis link aggregation, they call vLAG. We use this for cross datacenter aggregation. They do have the L3 features you are looking for and BGP as a possibility, but no full tables. It is a cut-through switch (although this can be toggled in software to store and forward in later switch os). I believe, although I can't find the doc where I read this at the moment, the packet buffer is 2G, but shared among ports. Enterasys S-Series is also an option, but the 10G port densities are much lower. S-Series has large packet buffers, chassis bonding, and L3 features (some modules support full bgp tables).

1 0

Fwd: Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC
by Nick Hilliard 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

andy(a)shady.org replied: Subject: Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 12:25:57 +0000 From: andy <andy(a)shady.org> To: Nick Hilliard <nick(a)foobar.org> CC: Piotr <piotr.1234(a)interia.pl>, nanog(a)nanog.org Force10's S4810 isnt bad, we use these for a 10G 48 port box that doesnt require Ultra Low latency. http://www.scribd.com/doc/90301756/Dell-Force10-S4810-Spec-Sheet Supports TRILL in some way too, Ive not had any major issues with this box, 1 or 2 bugs, but force10 (now dell) seem quick to fix these. They also have the Z9000 series, Ive not looked at this, but it might be worth having a quick look and see if it fits. on the rest, what nick said..... :) On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:58:14AM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 29/01/2013 11:27, Piotr wrote: > > Extreme 670 looks good but they have small port buffers. It can be also > > some small chassis with line cards but the cost per 10G ports is too big.. > > the extreme x670, juniper ex4550, brocade ICX6550 and arista 7150 will most > of this, and probably many others too. > > None of them will do trill. The Extreme X670 and Juniper EX4550 will both > do VPLS, though. The X670 won't do BGP. > > You won't find a box of this form with large port buffers. There don't > appear to be any of these boxes on the market at the moment, probably > because none of the switch vendors want to bite the bottom out of their > more lucrative chassis-based switches. This is a good market opening for a > new vendor - there is no technical reason why this couldn't be done. > > Nick > > > -- andy andy(a)shady.org ----------------------------------------------- Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience. JNCIE #742 -----------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Looking for success stories in Qwest/Centurylink land
by Scott Weeks 29 Jan '13

29 Jan '13

--- mureninc(a)gmail.com wrote: From: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc(a)gmail.com> > Here is a link to the Australian National Broadband site, describing how the > existing telco-owned copper network will be "switched off": > http://www.nbn.gov.au/2012/12/03/did-you-know-that-our-copper-network-is-be… Do they have any customers object? I recall a few recent stories about Verizon having problems after Sandy with NYC customers insisting that they want DSL restored instead of the FiOS brought in. -------------------------------------------- Having listened to ausnog for a while, I'm not so sure about how well that has/is worked/working for Australia. scott

1 0

Slashdot: UK ISP PlusNet Testing Carrier-Grade NAT Instead of IPv6
by fredrik danerklint 28 Jan '13

28 Jan '13

From the article: "Faced with the shortage of IPv4 addresses and the failure of IPv6 to take off, British ISP PlusNet is testing carrier-grade network address translation CG-NAT, where potentially all the ISP's customers could be sharing one IP address, through a gateway. The move is controversial as it could make some Internet services fail, but PlusNet says it is inevitable, and only a test at this stage." http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/01/16/1417244/uk-isp-plusnet-testing-carr… I'm only here to bring you the news. So don't complain to me... -- http://tlmc.fredan.se

28 60

What would a Step-by-Step Framework for Planning an IPv6 Deployment Look Like?
by Mukom Akong T. 28 Jan '13

28 Jan '13

Hello all, One of the questions I often get asked during after teaching/facilitating and IPv6 session is: "Now I know all these tech bits and how they come together, but what are the steps for deploying IPv6?" I've often scratched my head because I thought 'that's obvious', however I gave have detailed and have decided to provide a framework that anyone could use and would like to get critiques and suggestions on how to improve this for folks looking how to kickstart their IPv6 deployment project. http://techxcellence.net/2013/01/28/step-by-step-framework-for-planning-ipv… Surprisingly, these are very familiar steps that almost everyone who has done a project in the past can relate to. The steps are: 1. Set Clear Goals for the IPv6 Deployment Project. 2. Identify the List of Tasks Required to Achieve each Goal. 3. Identify Resources Required to Accomplish each Task. 4. Get Management Approval/Sign-off for the Project. 5. Execute the Plan, Documenting Everything as you go. 6. Update Relevant Organisational Processes to Integrate new Capabilities Resulting from the Deployment. These are quite obvious steps, however what each of them means and the thought process required to clarify each is what have detailed. I'd like your comments and also your suggestions on what you can do to move your IPv6 Deployment project from and "incomplete pile of unclear stuff" to and organised set of tasks that will surely lead you towards a working IPv6 deployment? Please share. Regards and have a wonderful week! [Disclaimer]: Like with all my posts, ALL opinions are mine and do not necessary represent the views or positions of any of my professional affiliations. Mukom Akong T. http://about.me/perfexcellence | twitter: @perfexcellent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ “When you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of the hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

HI
by frnkblk＠iname.com 27 Jan '13

27 Jan '13

The message was undeliverable due to the following reason(s): Your message could not be delivered because the destination computer was unreachable within the allowed queue period. The amount of time a message is queued before it is returned depends on local configura- tion parameters. Most likely there is a network problem that prevented delivery, but it is also possible that the computer is turned off, or does not have a mail system running right now. Your message was not delivered within 3 days: Host 77.170.249.97 is not responding. The following recipients did not receive this message: <nanog(a)nanog.org> Please reply to postmaster(a)iname.com if you feel this message to be in error.

1 0

None
by Rose Klimovich 26 Jan '13

26 Jan '13

http://lake-michigan.com.mx/206624.php

1 0