- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

Subject: AS path analysis tools
by Demetrius Christian 11 Sep '97

11 Sep '97

Hello, Does anybody know of some analysis tools I can make use of to justify peering with someone? My router is a CISCO running BGP ver 4. This could also be useful to decide where my traffic split will be amongst a few BGP peers. Many thanks Demetrius

2 1

Attn after mergers please update your contact information
by Sean Donelan 11 Sep '97

11 Sep '97

>I hate when contact numbers are disconnected. Does anyone have a good >contact for MAI.net? I'm shocked and amazed :-) When you buy, aquire, merge, swap, break-up, split, or leave providers, PLEASE update the contact information. This effects providers of all sizes (before and after the merger). P.S. just because you are a phone company doesn't mean everyone can dial your 'special' 811-xxxx or 1-800-xxx-xxxx phone number. Have a plain-old internationally diallable phone number for your NOC. This has been a recorded message.... -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation

2 1

RE: Randy Bush et al
by Vincent J. Bono 11 Sep '97

11 Sep '97

Well. After getting back from a trip I find, what? That Mr. Bush has a bug up his ass. Bottom line: - We do default route. Into a Sprint T3 that we pay for. :-) - We do not pass no-next-hop-self routes - Check around, if someone was as bright as they think they are it would be obvious. - We only peered with Verio in the first place becuase someone other than Randy contacted us - We formerly sent a lot of traffic to Verio because it's customers love porn, and we have several rather large web farms downstream. The number listed in whois is bad, sorry, it happens. But the number on our web site is not. When there is a problem and we are involved, I say so. There was no problem here and we won't miss Verio peering one bit. Vinny vbono(a)comstor.com 888-624-8700 NOC 702-802-0222 ext 3148 voice BTW: Below is the "snotty" message that was sent to our NOC and it's reply. Who was snottier than who? ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 02:34:58 -0400 From: Matt Luebke <mluebke(a)mclean.mai.net> To: Randy Bush <randy(a)verio.net> Cc: noc(a)verio.net, noc(a)mai.net Subject: Re: you have been depeered Randy Bush wrote: > your peering at mae-east is very unacceptable. the phone number in whois is > answered by a modem. so you have been de-peered with 2914. > > randy Our peering at mae-east is very acceptable to us. However we find that Verio brings nothing to our table. Thank you and Goodbye. Matt

1 0

Re: too many routes
by Peter Lothberg 11 Sep '97

11 Sep '97

> Nathan Stratton <nathan(a)netrail.net> writes: > > > This is what I beleave sprint is doing. They are using the new Cisco 12000 > > GSR with external router servers. It is a smart way of patching the > > problem. If you need more CPU or memory you can just add a bigger box and > > more RAM. > > The GSRs are to move bits fast. They are not to act as > route servers. > > Sprint recently announced that they are deploying 622Mbps > POS cross-country links, and the GSRs are the only things > you can put on the ends of such beasts that are available > today. > > (Someone may point out that it may not be the only choice > for very long, however, it's the only one whose design I > know and have had any influence upon, and is therefore > frankly the only one I trust, although I don't expect the > people building the competing box will ship anything but a > good product even if they are now rather deeply in bed > with the cell-heads and about as transparent to most > observers as the Kremlin during the cold war... Well, Ericsson did spend around $1,250Mil trying to develop their own ATM switch as part of ther AXE family. A total fiasko.. --Peter

1 0

Re: too many routes
by Sean M. Doran 11 Sep '97

11 Sep '97

Peter Lothberg <roll(a)stupi.se> writes: > Sprintlink does not use route-servers today, the RP in the GSR is > probably enough for a while, right now it's not very busy. After convergence the CPU in any distributed switching framework should be a function of the routing algorithms and the amount of background noise. However, to close off the nit-pick, the RP in the GSR seems to perform spectacularly well even under unusually heavy routing load. This is great as long as there is no need to replace the RP before a replacement is technologically feasible... Sean.

1 0

Re: too many routes
by Peter Lothberg 10 Sep '97

10 Sep '97

> This is what I beleave sprint is doing. They are using the new Cisco 12000 > GSR with external router servers. It is a smart way of patching the > problem. If you need more CPU or memory you can just add a bigger box and > more RAM. > > > Nathan Stratton President, CTO, NetRail,Inc. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Phone (888)NetRail NetRail, Inc. > Fax (404)522-1939 230 Peachtree Suite 500 > WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Atlanta, GA 30303 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "No king is saved by the size of his army; no warrior escapes by his > great strength. - Psalm 33:16 Sprintlink does not use route-servers today, the RP in the GSR is probably enough for a while, right now it's not very busy. sl-bb10-stk>sh proc cpu CPU utilization for five seconds: 1%/0%; one minute: 2%; five minutes: 2% sl-bb10-stk>sh ip bgp sum BGP table version is 2134008, main routing table version 2134008 46450 network entries (218561/293390 paths) using 14209540 bytes of memory 15864 BGP path attribute entries using 2134920 bytes of memory 0 BGP route-map cache entries using 0 bytes of memory 0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory 230083 prefixes revised. --Peter

1 0

Re: too many routes
by Peter Lothberg 10 Sep '97

10 Sep '97

> > On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, Joseph T. Klein wrote: > > > > > The routes issue historically comes down to the fact that Sprint did not > > > want to convert from Cisco 4000 to Ciscos that had larger memory capacity. > > > Memory is cheap these days ... the big boys just don't wish to have a > > > free market. > > > > I do not think sprint had 4000s in their backbone, they had AGS+ routers. > > The problem is not the lack of memory, but that the CPU can not process > > all the date in the memory when it needs to. The cisco 7500 have that > > same prob, sure you can put 256 megs of RAM in them, but can the CPU > > recalculate the next hop if most of that date in that RAM changes? > > The new RSP4 card may have solved that, we may be at a point now where the > > router has enough processor to be able to process all the data it has > > stored in memory and do it quickly. > > AGS+'s only could handle 16meg, the cpu in a AGS+ is the same as in a 7000 > series, (motorola 68040) As of a year ago, I believe I heard that sprint > still had AGS+'s in their backbone and were upgrading them to 7000 series > equipment. > > -- Jason > Jason Vanick ------------------------------------------ jvanick(a)megsinet.net > Network Operations Manager V: 312-245-9015 > MegsInet, Inc. 225 West Ohio St. Suite #400 Chicago, Il 60610 In 1992 Sprintlink had AGS+ routers in it's network, so did everyone else. The AGS+'es where replaced by 7000's with 64M and SSE's and then 'downgraded' to 75xx routers with 128M. The current Sprintlink core is a mix of 75xx routers with 128M and VIP2/80-POS oc3c interfaces and cisco 12000 routers with 256M and oc3c and oc12c. -Peter

1 0

Re: Network Diagramming Software
by Dave Curado 10 Sep '97

10 Sep '97

I don't think it does everything you want, but a package called NetViz seems to be made for network diagramming -- produces html and imagemaps and interesting stuff like that. I picked up this blurb at: http://www5.zdnet.com/cshopper/content/9608/cshp0147.html

1 0

RE: too many routes
by Sanjay Dani 10 Sep '97

10 Sep '97

>>Please people, we must stop abstructions to keep the market open and >>competitive. > >Can you spell "economies of scale"? Or "using fiber at cost means >owning the fiber"? If you want to play the backbone game you've >got to own long-haul transmission facilities. > >A small backbone provider simply cannot be competitive; no more than >neighbour garage can compete with Chrysler. There are backbone providers and there are providers of specialized ISP or hosting or security etc. services that need independent* IP address space and do not have to waste resources on building a private "backbone". I had thought predicting consolidation in the Internet services market was an exclusive realm of only the clueless "market research" firms. Even they seem to be wisening up. --- *So they can avoid the slowest "backbone" of the month on an on-going basis.

1 0

Re: gated.conf
by Neil J. McRae 10 Sep '97

10 Sep '97

On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 17:44:07 +0100 "Neil J. McRae" <neil(a)domino.org> wrote: Sorry I didn't mean to CC this to nanog.... > On Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:44:31 -0400 (EDT) > "John G. Scudder" <jgs(a)ieng.com> wrote: > > > > > They're matched sequentially, so the ".*" filter should be moved > > to the bottom, otherwise all the "restrict" filters will have no > > effect. > > OK cool. > > > Does the IENG sell gated? I desperately need a copy for a single PC that > i have [i run a largish backbone of GRF's] and communities and prepend > is something that I really really am desperate for. > > Thanks, > neil > > -- > Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking. Domino: In the glow of the night. > neil(a)DOMINO.ORG NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor) > Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A> > -- Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking. Domino: In the glow of the night. neil(a)DOMINO.ORG NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor) Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A>

1 0