May 2001 - Test - lists.nanog.org

graphical display of routes
by Mikael Abrahamsson 03 May '01

03 May '01

I've been thinking of how to solve the "problem" of knowing what adresses are routed or not in our IGP. Does anyone know of a utility that you can feed a "show ip route ospf" or perhaps via snmp someway, that'll display what part of the IP space there is a route for or not, perhaps divided by /24 or /19 or something. What I was thinking of was to create a gif, with one pixel per IP number, so a /30 route would show up as a 4 pixel line etc. A /19 would then be a block of 256 times 32 pixels, where one can fairly easily see what IPs are being routed or not. It seems to be a common problem that link nets come and go and are not being reused.... Any good ideas? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se

1 0

Looking for a provider..
by kevin graham 02 May '01

02 May '01

We're trying to find secondary IP transit in Level3's 1380 Kifer (San Jose) facility. fastether cross connects would be preferable, but OC3 (ATM or PoS) would be OK. If anyone knows who's there that could do this, I'd appreciate a private reply.. Thanks. ..kg..

1 0

terminal server recommendation
by Charles Smith 02 May '01

02 May '01

I would like to deploy a terminal server in several of my POPs, however cost is a slight issue. Can anyone on the list recommend a fairly inexpensive terminal server (besides Cisco)? Obviously the terminal server should be reliable and work - it is the little things that count. chas _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

11 15

Re: terminal server recommendation
by SMcGrath＠dhhs.state.nh.us 02 May '01

02 May '01

Charles, Look at the Xyplex terminal servers, They have all the features of the Cisco boxen and are very reliable when I was working for the airlines we would install them in maintenance hangars for terminal access and forget them for years You can purchase them new or they show up on ebay for 1-300 dollars and you can purchase a maintenance agreement for a very reasonable price. They have several lines the 18xx which boot from floppies/tftp/mop and are disco'd but can be had for less than $100 and have most of the feaures of the current 16xx/72x series which boot from flash/tftp the 16xx series is a stackable series and the 72x series goes in the Network 9000 chassis system. You can check out their spec's at www.nbase-xyplex.com. The connection on all of their devices are RJ-45's so cross patching is easy and 3 wire configs do work Hope this helps - Scott "Charles Smith" <chasmith9(a)hotmail.com>@merit.edu on 05/01/2001 04:12:34 PM Sent by: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: nanog(a)merit.edu cc: Subject: terminal server recommendation I would like to deploy a terminal server in several of my POPs, however cost is a slight issue. Can anyone on the list recommend a fairly inexpensive terminal server (besides Cisco)? Obviously the terminal server should be reliable and work - it is the little things that count. chas _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

1 0

RE: black hat .cn networks
by Roeland Meyer 02 May '01

02 May '01

How quickly can CN be firewalled anyway? > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:goemon@anime.net] > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 2:59 PM > To: 'nanog(a)merit.edu' > Subject: black hat .cn networks > > > > http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,43437,00.html > > Time to drop AS4134. > > -Dan > >

13 17

Re: terminal server recommendation
by SMcGrath＠dhhs.state.nh.us 02 May '01

02 May '01

C

1 0

RE: terminal server recommendation
by Martin, Christian 02 May '01

02 May '01

Charles, Agreed on some of your points - The ssh issue would be the biggest problem, however we separate the term servers on a private, out-of-band network, so we haven't been particularly concerned with telnet snooping, especially considering the ssh code on Cisco still only has limited platform support. Something to bring up with our security team nonetheless. We haven't sen the amphenols dislodge, and we have hundreds of these babies, so that is weird. Maybe a lot of them are dropped downward - haven't inspected them all. As far as configs, we can manually copy them via FTP, but as I said, we only use them for Tservers, so nothing to fancy with PPP, etc. We do use RADIUS, which hasn't been a big issue. I think the primary reason we use them is high port density and our original network engineers had extensive experience with them, so they've stuck around. How many large NSPs have whole racks of 2511s in the field (I think a lot). The setup and recovery totally sucks. I remember the first time I reloaded one. It prompted for the boot file and I put the config filename in by mistake. Whoops, tserver is dead, have to dispatch with a wacky-pinout-having console cable and rebuild. *sigh* We are replacing them with 3660's, unless someone has a better recommendation (The primary reason being TACACS+ support). chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork@inch.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 9:28 PM > To: Martin, Christian > Cc: 'Charles Smith'; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: terminal server recommendation > > > On Tue, 1 May 2001, Martin, Christian wrote: > > > The Xylogics/Bay/Nortel Remote Annex 4000 can support up tp > 72 console > > ports, and has a great menu interface with great EIA-232 > functionality. > > Eh? Unless they've added command completion and history, I have to > disagree there... Add to that that they don't self-boot and that you > can't save your config off the box. And you will *not* just > set the thing > up in a half hour. > > > Ports don't hang, they reset on time, etc. They use > amphenol connectors > > across 25 pair which makes for easy punchdowns and cross-connects. > > The amphenols have a nasty habit of not seating properly, > especially when > the box is in a cabinet and some cables have to go upwards rather than > down... And when they're half-in, or not perfectly level you > one day find > you can reach four of your six devices... > > And there's no ssh. > > > One caveat - they are EOL.... > > Thank God :) > > But the code seems to have lived on for a while in the Bay 5300 access > servers. I think only Concentric bought into that sham > though. Some evil > things just cannot be killed by normal means. Although a > good "ping -s > 1500" directed at an attached PPP user will render it useless > until you > stop. > > Perhaps it's because I'm still forced to use them since we > have them left > over from when they were dialup PPP servers or something, but > I like them > less than stinky cheese. I do get a bit nostalgic because it was the > first thing I ever "su'd" on, and it does have a BSD code base. But I > certainly would recommend anything else over an Annex. > > BTW, wanna buy one? I've got a spare 4000 and two Annex 3's, > and a box > full of octopus cable... > > MHO, > > Charles > > > chris > > > > > > > > > > I would like to deploy a terminal server in several of my > > > POPs, however cost > > > is a slight issue. Can anyone on the list recommend a fairly > > > inexpensive > > > terminal server (besides Cisco)? Obviously the terminal > > > server should be > > > reliable and work - it is the little things that count. > > > > > > chas > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > > > > > > >

3 2

Re: terminal server recommendation
by Scott Gifford 02 May '01

02 May '01

Charles Sprickman <spork(a)inch.com> writes: > On Tue, 1 May 2001, Martin, Christian wrote: > > > The Xylogics/Bay/Nortel Remote Annex 4000 can support up tp 72 console > > ports, and has a great menu interface with great EIA-232 functionality. > > Eh? Unless they've added command completion and history, I have to > disagree there... You don't need command completion and history for a menu interface: 1. Connect to cisco router 2. Connect to mail server 3. Connect to Web server Pick one> is similar to what we used, and was pretty much all we found necessary. They have a neat feature, too, where you can configure whatever you connect to serial port 1 to be reachable via telnet to port 5001, port 2 to 5002, etc. Great for scripts. > Add to that that they don't self-boot and that you can't save your > config off the box. If these are at all similar to other similar Bay Networks terminal server products (and I'm pretty sure they are), they'll self-boot if you put flash into them, and you can save your configuration with the "na" utility. > And you will *not* just set the thing > up in a half hour. > > > Ports don't hang, they reset on time, etc. They use amphenol connectors > > across 25 pair which makes for easy punchdowns and cross-connects. > > The amphenols have a nasty habit of not seating properly, especially when > the box is in a cabinet and some cables have to go upwards rather than > down... And when they're half-in, or not perfectly level you one day find > you can reach four of your six devices... > > And there's no ssh. > Those are all good points, though. :) [...] > Perhaps it's because I'm still forced to use them since we have them left > over from when they were dialup PPP servers or something, but I like them > less than stinky cheese. I do get a bit nostalgic because it was the > first thing I ever "su'd" on, and it does have a BSD code base. But I > certainly would recommend anything else over an Annex. You'll miss them when they're gone. I still miss logging into them... :) -----ScottG.

1 0

GSR Route Reflector: maximum number of clients?
by James DeMong 02 May '01

02 May '01

I have a GSR 12008 that is acting as a route reflector and core router. What is the practical maximum (from an operational standpoint) number of clients it can support? (My Cisco sources tell me that the maximum technically possible is large and does not significantly impact the operation the forwarding of the GSR.) In terms of manageability and simplicity, is it more favourable to have a separate box (e.g. 7206 VXR) handle the route reflector job? Thanks in advance for your thoughts. James __ James DeMong Network Design Specialist TELUS Advanced Communications Phone: (403) 503-3718 Email: James.DeMong(a)telus.com

3 2

RE: terminal server recommendation
by Martin, Christian 01 May '01

01 May '01

The Xylogics/Bay/Nortel Remote Annex 4000 can support up tp 72 console ports, and has a great menu interface with great EIA-232 functionality. Ports don't hang, they reset on time, etc. They use amphenol connectors across 25 pair which makes for easy punchdowns and cross-connects. One caveat - they are EOL.... chris > > I would like to deploy a terminal server in several of my > POPs, however cost > is a slight issue. Can anyone on the list recommend a fairly > inexpensive > terminal server (besides Cisco)? Obviously the terminal > server should be > reliable and work - it is the little things that count. > > chas > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > >

2 1