- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Re: RINA - scott whaps at the nanog hornets nest :-)
by Scott Weeks 11 Nov '10

11 Nov '10

--- dot(a)dotat.at wrote: From: Tony Finch <dot(a)dotat.at> On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Scott Weeks wrote: > The mapping server idea that several proposals use do not appear to keep > the smartness at the edges, rather they seem try to make a smarter core > network. Is a DNS server core or edge? ILNP aims to use the DNS as its mapping service. -------------------------------------------------- DNS root name servers are at the 'core'. No? scott

2 1

Re: AS path question.
by Scott Weeks 11 Nov '10

11 Nov '10

--- Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu wrote: From: Valdis.Kletnieks(a)vt.edu One has to wonder how many places are using the prepend-me-harder commands to do traffic engineering, and have absolutely no clue that their prepends are having the opposite effect because the prefix is being dropped entirely by some AS's. ------------------------------------------ Do you think (or is there evidence) that very many ASs use maxas-limit type commands? I have never used it and never had any problems... -------------------------------------- I suppose the exact same issue applies for those places that deaggregate in an attempt to to TE, and the de-aggregated prefixes get munched by somebody's prefix-length filter. ------------------------------------ Only if they're longer than a /24, though; yes? I imagine no one really filters shorter than a /24 these days. scott

2 1

Re: GRE Tunnels and MPLS
by Rettke, Brian 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

This seems to be working now with the 'mls mpls tunnel-recir' command entered. There are some potential downsides, but this should get things up and running until I create the new backup tunnels (GRE over IPSec) on a connected router that is not MPLS-enabled. Thanks! Sincerely, Brian A . Rettke RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 16:49:55 -0400 From: Shimol Shah <shimshah(a)cisco.com> Subject: Re: GRE Tunnels and MPLS To: nanog(a)nanog.org Message-ID: <4CD31C73.80004(a)cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Do you have recir enabled ? If not, good one to enable and check for status of issue. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/command/reference/mp_m1.html#wp101… "If you do not enable tunnel-MPLS recirculation, the IPv4 and IPv4-tunneled packets that need to be labeled (for example, the packets that are encapsulated with an MPLS header) will be corrupted when they are transmitted from the Cisco 7600 series router." Shimol On 11/4/10 4:00 PM, Rettke, Brian wrote: > Beginning work on our implementation of MPLS for the backbone network. I've run into difficulty with our GRE tunnels. The GRE Tunnel sits on our co-lo router (a Cisco 7600), and it uses a route-map to push our 10.x modem traffic to our DHCP servers. This is because the backbone is not complete and DHCP traffic needs to traverse the internet. What I have found is that when I enable basic MPLS on the co-location interfaces that head back to the individual systems, DHCP traffic still works, but ICMP and other 10.x traffic dies. There is also an intermittent problem with DHCP when it is enabled, where not all DISCOVERS are answered. I've tried everything I can think of, including adjusting MTU and TCP MSS. It only seems to impact when the co-location router has a GRE tunnel on one buffer, which it terminates, and then it has to encapsulate traffic with an MPLS tag before sending out of the other buffer. Theoretically, it should work, but I can't figure out if there is some prob lem with MPLS' interaction with the tunnel. Has anyone encountered something similar? > > Sincerely, > > Brian A . Rettke > RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP > Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services > >

2 4

AS path question.
by Greg Whynott 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

Recently I adjusted the maxas-limit option on our router, logs started reporting routes being refused because the AS path is to long. seems to work as expected. when I looked at the logs I was a bit confused at what i was looking at... why is it there are multiple AS's in the path that appear to be the same AS? I expected an AS path comprised of mostly unique ASs. instead of this: 476330: Nov 10 14:55:07.247 EDT: %BGP-6-ASPATH: Long AS path 549 26677 6939 21011 43022 43022 43022 43022 43022 47359 47359 47359 47359 47359 47359 47359 47359 received from isp router: More than configured MAXAS-LIMIT i expected it would look more like: 476330: Nov 10 14:55:07.247 EDT: %BGP-6-ASPATH: Long AS path 549 26677 6939 21011 43022 47359 received from … .. . thanks for your time again, greg -- This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.

8 8

eigrp distribute-list out vlan interface
by Andrey Khomyakov 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

Need to manipulate metric out to only one of the EIGRP neighbors only for default route. Trying to use distribute-list (can't think of anything else that can do that for me) The metric in the distribute-list does not seem to affect the default route at all. It still comes through with the metric of the redistribute command. I tried it in the lab and it worked. In the lab I used 3725 routers and physical interfaces. In production I have 4507R SUP6 and using a vlan interaface. Does anyone have any thoughts on why this does not work. Are vlan interfaces just not supported or is it a bug? Or am I misusing distribute-list all together? router eigrp 179 distribute-list route-map eigrp-redistribute-to-worcester out Vlan2517 network 0.0.0.0 redistribute static route-map eigrp-redistribute eigrp router-id 10.0.0.3 ip prefix-list all-routes permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 32 ! ip prefix-list eigrp-redistribute permit 10.0.28.0/24 ip prefix-list eigrp-redistribute permit 10.6.4.0/24 ! ip prefix-list eigrp-redistribute-default permit 0.0.0.0/0 ! ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.168.10 ip route 10.0.28.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.168.22 ip route 10.6.4.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.168.22 ! route-map eigrp-redistribute permit 10 match ip address prefix-list eigrp-redistribute set metric 100000 1 255 1 1500 ! route-map eigrp-redistribute permit 20 match ip address prefix-list eigrp-redistribute-default set metric 100000 10 255 1 1500 ! route-map eigrp-redistribute-to-worcester permit 10 match ip address prefix-list eigrp-redistribute-default set metric 50000 10 255 1 1500 ! route-map eigrp-redistribute-to-worcester permit 20 match ip address prefix-list all-routes -- Andrey Khomyakov [khomyakov.andrey(a)gmail.com]

1 0

Re: VM slicing and dicing
by chaim rieger 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

I use ucs, its hardware, still need the virtualization kernel somewhere in the mix. That said ucs is rock solid and imho beats hp and ibm blades hands down.

2 1

Re: RINA - scott whaps at the nanog hornets nest :-)
by Scott Weeks 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

--- eugen(a)leitl.org wrote: From: Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org> Networks are much too smart still, what you need is the barest decoration upon the raw physics of this universe. -------------------------------------- Yes, that's one thing I note. The mapping server idea that several proposals use do not appear to keep the smartness at the edges, rather they seem try to make a smarter core network. scott

3 2

Re: RINA - scott whaps at the nanog hornets nest :-)
by Scott Weeks 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

--- bill(a)herrin.us wrote: really would. Maybe you can tell me the page number, 'cause I just can't wade through the rest of it. ------------------------------------- Don't read anything until around chapter 6 or 7. Also, skip the last one. Thanks for the responses. scott

1 0

Re: OT: VM slicing and dicing
by chaim rieger 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

Kvm, opensource and closed Virt-manager will be your open source manager for this Also look into proxmox.

1 0

Migrating from PPP to DHCPo82
by MKS 09 Nov '10

09 Nov '10

Hi list I work for an small ISP, which does traditional xDSL service with PPPoE. Currently we are in the process of migrating most of our customers to DHCP (some customers are getting new CPEs and some will be sw upgraded remotely ). It would be great if someone has the time to share their experience (on- or offline) from such a migration. Common pitfals and perhaps what whey would do differently "next time". I know that every network is different but I believe that there are some general concerns, specially around security of DHCP and security features for vendors around DHCP and DHCP snooping etc. What about 802.1x, is that generally being deployed with option82? Regards MKS

5 7