March 2010 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: "Is TDM going the way of dial-up?"
by Frank A. Coluccio 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

re: "what is the state of voip-over-cellular as essentially the last holdout of TDM? Will the new 4G stuff be able to support latencies, etc? Has the work on handovers-over-IP matured enough that it's viable?" One of the biggest hurdles in bringing Ethernet to mobile/cellular apps has been its lack of synchronous capabilities. This is now being overcome in a variety of ways, both IETF-instigated and at IEEE, and through some proprietary solutions where vendors are re-introducing system clocking. See my footer note <fac:> that addresses this subject at the bottom of [1]this message. --- mike(a)mtcc.com wrote: From: Michael Thomas <mike(a)mtcc.com> To: Steve Meuse <smeuse(a)mara.org> Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: "Is TDM going the way of dial-up?" Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:33:38 -0700 On 03/26/2010 08:26 AM, Steve Meuse wrote: > Rick Ernst expunged (nanog(a)shreddedmail.com) > >> I'm wondering if others are seeing the same behavior, if it's >> market-dependant, or if I'm just imagining things. I'm working on building >> new infrastructure and my current thoughts are to minimize my TDM >> footprint. It would be useful to get a better feel if this is an overall >> trend or something local. > > You aren't imagining things. In fact, some large national networks have been designed to support solely ethernet. It comes down to cost, as always.... Speaking of which, what is the state of voip-over-cellular as essentially the last holdout of TDM? Will the new 4G stuff be able to support latencies, etc? Has the work on handovers-over-IP matured enough that it's viable? Mike References 1. http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=26408512

1 0

Call for papers (Deadline Extended): ISP-10, USA, July 2010
by James Heralds 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

It would be highly appreciated if you could share this announcement with your colleagues, students and individuals whose research is in information security, cryptography, privacy, and related areas. Call for papers (Deadline Extended): ISP-10, USA, July 2010 The 2010 International Conference on Information Security and Privacy (ISP-10) (website: http://www.PromoteResearch.org<http://www.promoteresearch.org/>) will be held during 12-14 of July 2010 in Orlando, FL, USA. ISP is an important event in the areas of information security, privacy, cryptography and related topics. The conference will be held at the same time and location where several other major international conferences will be taking place. The conference will be held as part of 2010 multi-conference (MULTICONF-10). MULTICONF-10 will be held during July 12-14, 2010 in Orlando, Florida, USA. The primary goal of MULTICONF is to promote research and developmental activities in computer science, information technology, control engineering, and related fields. Another goal is to promote the dissemination of research to a multidisciplinary audience and to facilitate communication among researchers, developers, practitioners in different fields. The following conferences are planned to be organized as part of MULTICONF-10. • International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Pattern Recognition (AIPR-10) • International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Control Systems (ARCS-10) • International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, Genomics and Chemoinformatics (BCBGC-10) • International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (CCN-10) • International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems and Web Technologies (EISWT-10) • International Conference on High Performance Computing Systems (HPCS-10) • International Conference on Information Security and Privacy (ISP-10) • International Conference on Image and Video Processing and Computer Vision (IVPCV-10) • International Conference on Software Engineering Theory and Practice (SETP-10) • International Conference on Theoretical and Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (TMFCS-10) MULTICONF-10 will be held at Imperial Swan Hotel and Suites. It is a full-service resort that puts you in the middle of the fun! Located 1/2 block south of the famed International Drive, the hotel is just minutes from great entertainment like Walt Disney World® Resort, Universal Studios and Sea World Orlando. Guests can enjoy free scheduled transportation to these theme parks, as well as spacious accommodations, outdoor pools and on-site dining — all situated on 10 tropically landscaped acres. Here, guests can experience a full-service resort with discount hotel pricing in Orlando. We invite draft paper submissions. Please see the website http://www.PromoteResearch.org <http://www.promoteresearch.org/> for more details.

5 4

Hotmail and player.play.it
by JoeSox 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

I just ran into this problem about two or so weeks ago hoping it would go away. I am denying 'player.play.it' [currently resolving to 67.148.71.9, 67.148.71.11] on my Juniper firewall. However I get denied navigating to 'hotmail.com' [policy says it is 67.148.71.11 causing the trouble] I don't see any player.play.it references in the html or anything (including the live.com sites unless I am missing something). Any hotmail admins fix this or something or maybe I am missing something else. -- Thanks, Joe

2 2

Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
by Babak Pasdar 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Bryan, We have built out our infrastructure around A10 and after doing our own due diligence on them, we like them for the following reasons: 1. The performance is outrageous (in a good way) in terms of: a. Total number of sessions supported b. Ramp Rate (New connections per second) c. Throughput, up to 37+ gig in our tests Quite frankly A10 is the only company we found that could help us deliver on a secure 100Gig plus network that we designed for a client. Their specs were 100Gig today with scalability to 200Gig. The AX-5200 delivered as advertised for us. F5 didn't even come close to scaling to these levels in our testing. 2. The interface is reasonably decent, but could stand some refinement. The aPolicy is for the most part a one-for-one replacement of the F5 TCL iPolicy. So transitioning should be pretty straight -forward. 3. The company is a good company with good support. Lee Chen, one of the founders of Foundry Networks started A10. I went to California and met with him and his engineering team to see the type of folks we would be engaging with. They were extremely pleasant to deal with, unlike a lot of the other companies out there today. The foundation of the system is that they came up with a process to make Parallelization far more efficient than the standard high-performance OSes like Linux and Unix. This lets them throttle through scenarios that bog down other systems. We have seen first-hand how the systems performance has addressed DNS DoS scenarios where F5 fell down on the job. 4. Finally, the cost is far more pleasant than the nickle and diming that F5 does for this license and that license. This is the one area F5 should really get dinged on. I don't at all care for the In our scenario it came in at roughly 40% less than F5. All-in-all my advice is you can't go wrong with the A10 unless there is some specific feature that is missing. We have not found any for our purposes. Quite frankly I feel that many people are unnecessarily afraid to migrate away from F5. Not that F5 is a bad product or company, but competition is good and A10 is a good competitor. We are very pleased with our decision to go with A10. I hope this is useful feedback for you. Best Regards, Babak -- Babak Pasdar President & CEO | Certified Ethical Hacker Bat Blue Corporation | Integrity . Privacy . Availability (p) 212.461.3322 x3005 | (f) 212.584.9999 | (w) www.BatBlue.com Receive Bat Blue's Daily Security Intelligence Report Bat Blue's AS: 25885 | BGP Policy | Peering Policy Bat Blue's Legal Notice Reducing IT Security Budget, Burden & Risk - Video | Article > -----Original Message----- > From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > > Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company and > their products? They claim 2x the performance at ? the cost and am a bit > leery as you can imagine. > > We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating > these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes. > > > > > Regards, > > Bryan > > >

1 0

Yahoo Mail admin
by St. Onge,Adam 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Does anyone have a contact for a yahoo mail admin that they could please provide offlist? We removed some mx records in late February but are still seeing yahoo servers attempting to deliver mail to these addresses. Thanks, Adam ============================================================================== This communication, including attachments, is confidential, may be subject to legal privileges, and is intended for the sole use of the addressee. Any use, duplication, disclosure or dissemination of this communication, other than by the addressee, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy this communication and all copies.

1 0

10GBase-t switch
by Mirko Maffioli 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

I'm searching for a switch with at least one 10Gbase-T ethernet port and some gigabit ethernet for lab test. >From cisco web site i've seen for example a 3560 model with X2 module and CX4 port but nothing with 10Gb-T. Unfortunately my budget couldn't arrive to nexus or cat6500.... Do you have some other vendor model i can check? Bye Mirko

20 22

Re: 10GBase-t switch
by Jack Sinha 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Another option you can look at is TwinAx copper cables. There are lots of products that support it including - TurboIron24X from Brocade/Foundry, Arista boxes and BNT boxes. Jack

1 0

Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
by Welch, Bryan 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company and their products? They claim 2x the performance at ½ the cost and am a bit leery as you can imagine. We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes. Regards, Bryan

6 6

Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122
by Rudolph Daniel 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Hi Joe You guys ever mount your racks on Barry mounts= vibration mounts..with so many shakes you may need to. RD > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:14:12 -0700 > From: Joe Abley <jabley(a)hopcount.ca> > Subject: Re: Earthquakes > To: Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour(a)gmail.com> > Cc: NANOG list <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Message-ID: <69CB2FCE-3D0E-44FE-93F4-8F3776DAD18D(a)hopcount.ca> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > On 2010-03-24, at 13:12, Ken Gilmour wrote: > > > We had a 6.2 last year in Costa Rica... We immediately regretted where we > > had placed our racks and are almost finished a project to move them to a > > concrete floor (rather than that compressed cardboard stuff). Lost a lot > of > > hard drives that day! We regularly have quakes between the 4-5 region > here. > > By regularly, i mean a minimum of 5 times a year in different parts of > the > > country. > > If there is interest in data centre provisioning or construction, disaster > planning or inside/outside plant strategies intended to mitigate damage by > earthquakes then the NZNOG list might well be a good English-language place > to get some advice. > > Earthquakes of magnitude 4 and up happen pretty regularly (several times > per week is common). > > http://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/quakes/recent_quakes.html > http://www.nznog.org/ > > > Joe > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:19:54 -0400 > From: "Peter Rocca" <rocca(a)start.ca> > Subject: Cogeco Contact...? > To: <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Message-ID: > <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD35(a)pigeon.start.local> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at > roccap2005(a)yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices(a)cogeco.net and > 1-905-333-7055 without luck. Thank you. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:34:52 -0400 > From: "Peter Rocca" <rocca(a)start.ca> > Subject: RE: Cogeco Contact...? > To: <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Message-ID: > <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD38(a)pigeon.start.local> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Thanks all, success. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Rocca [mailto:rocca@start.ca] > Sent: March 24, 2010 8:20 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Cogeco Contact...? > > Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at > roccap2005(a)yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices(a)cogeco.net and > 1-905-333-7055 without luck. Thank you. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:46:27 -0700 > From: Darren Bolding <darren(a)bolding.org> > Subject: Re: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > To: Justin Horstman <jhorstman(a)adknowledge.com> > Cc: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch(a)arrisi.com>, "nanog(a)nanog.org" > <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Message-ID: > <5a318d411003241846ue709334icce03515da414d3e(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Very interesting to see about A10's performance- I've heard mixed things > about them. > > Just an FYI, the newer F5 platforms don't utilize the ASIC's- the > performance curve of general-purpose CPU's has once again eclipsed what can > be done with specialized silicon without aggressive (and expensive) > revision > cycles. The ASIC's also could only be used in simpler virtual server > configurations and with certain subsets of iRules. > > That said, nothing else I'm aware of provides the functionality of iRules. > I've used netscalers only a relatively small amount- and they are nice- > particularly if your requirements are within their feature set- but my > experience has been that things I take for granted using an iRule are > seriously painful to implement on a netscaler. > > --D > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Justin Horstman > <jhorstman(a)adknowledge.com>wrote: > > > The boxes do alright at low load levels. They do not have an asic tech > like > > the F5s so choke on large amounts of traffic. Management is a bit > immature > > and you will find yourself having to use the CLI and the Gui to > accomplish > > most advanced tasks. > > > > When we put them head to head A10 AX3200 vs F5 6400 ltm (note: 6400 was > > what we were looking to replace) > > > > Test: > > 1000 concurrent users from Gomez's Networks Loadtesting platform hitting > as > > fast as the requests would close, going through our standard vip config > on > > the f5, and the A10 engineering teams 3 best efforts to beat that config > > that balanced between two Identical Dell 1950 servers serving a php page > > that responded with a random number (to avoid caching). The 6400 we used > was > > in production at the time, and was older so we were expecting to get > blown > > away, see the results here: > > > > F5 - Peaked 160k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 > minutes, > > 0 errors, 112ms average transaction response time > > A10 - Held 60k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes, > 0 > > errors, 360ms average transaction response time > > > > If anyone is interested in the graphs I think I can still pull them out > of > > gomez. Though notable that this was all done a year ago, so things might > be > > different now. > > > > ~J > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM > > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > > Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > > > > Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company > and > > their products? They claim 2x the performance at ? the cost and am a bit > > leery as you can imagine. > > > > We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating > > these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Bryan > > > > > > > > > -- > -- Darren Bolding -- > -- darren(a)bolding.org -- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:50:42 -0700 > From: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch(a)arrisi.com> > Subject: RE: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > To: Darren Bolding <darren(a)bolding.org>, Justin Horstman > <jhorstman(a)adknowledge.com> > Cc: "nanog(a)nanog.org" <nanog(a)nanog.org> > Message-ID: > < > DFA5AECDEC85EE4087D45C463C19B375134183938E(a)KWAEXMAIL1.ARRS.ARRISI.COM> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Yes, agreed. I think the Netscaler falls into the category of the Cisco in > this respect <ducks>. Seems the F5 gear is the 1000lb gorilla in this > category and for the most part we have no reason to look anywhere else other > than doing our own due diligence with respect to the other vendor offerings > in this space. > > > > Regards, > > Bryan > > From: packetmonger(a)gmail.com [mailto:packetmonger@gmail.com] On Behalf Of > Darren Bolding > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 6:46 PM > To: Justin Horstman > Cc: Welch, Bryan; nanog(a)nanog.org > Subject: Re: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > > Very interesting to see about A10's performance- I've heard mixed things > about them. > > Just an FYI, the newer F5 platforms don't utilize the ASIC's- the > performance curve of general-purpose CPU's has once again eclipsed what can > be done with specialized silicon without aggressive (and expensive) revision > cycles. The ASIC's also could only be used in simpler virtual server > configurations and with certain subsets of iRules. > > That said, nothing else I'm aware of provides the functionality of iRules. > I've used netscalers only a relatively small amount- and they are nice- > particularly if your requirements are within their feature set- but my > experience has been that things I take for granted using an iRule are > seriously painful to implement on a netscaler. > > --D > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Justin Horstman < > jhorstman(a)adknowledge.com<mailto:jhorstman@adknowledge.com>> wrote: > The boxes do alright at low load levels. They do not have an asic tech like > the F5s so choke on large amounts of traffic. Management is a bit immature > and you will find yourself having to use the CLI and the Gui to accomplish > most advanced tasks. > > When we put them head to head A10 AX3200 vs F5 6400 ltm (note: 6400 was > what we were looking to replace) > > Test: > 1000 concurrent users from Gomez's Networks Loadtesting platform hitting as > fast as the requests would close, going through our standard vip config on > the f5, and the A10 engineering teams 3 best efforts to beat that config > that balanced between two Identical Dell 1950 servers serving a php page > that responded with a random number (to avoid caching). The 6400 we used was > in production at the time, and was older so we were expecting to get blown > away, see the results here: > > F5 - Peaked 160k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes, > 0 errors, 112ms average transaction response time > A10 - Held 60k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes, 0 > errors, 360ms average transaction response time > > If anyone is interested in the graphs I think I can still pull them out of > gomez. Though notable that this was all done a year ago, so things might be > different now. > > ~J > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com<mailto: > Bryan.Welch(a)arrisi.com>] > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM > To: nanog(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers? > > Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company and > their products? They claim 2x the performance at ? the cost and am a bit > leery as you can imagine. > > We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating > these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes. > > > > > Regards, > > Bryan > > > > > -- > -- Darren Bolding -- > -- darren(a)bolding.org<mailto:darren@bolding.org> -- > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > NANOG(a)nanog.org > https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog > > End of NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122 > ************************************** > -- Rudi Daniel e Business Consultant http://www.svgpso.org http://oecstimes.wordpress.com “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” - Bertrand Russell

2 1

Earthquakes
by Jeroen van Aart 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

I saw a recent(-ish) short thread about a mag. 4 quake in the SF Bay Area. This http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsus/Maps/US2/36.38.-123.-121… should provide with everything you need to know. I check it on a daily basis and it's been rather quiet the past week or 2 or so. Actually I guess it's been rather quiet ever since the 1989 quake, but then a year or so ago I woke up in the morning from some rattling doors so I guess it all depends on your perspective. So far the "worst" quake ever I experienced was in the Netherlands back around 1988. Magn. 5.2 or something. Which is interesting considering these happen like once every 6 million years or thereabouts ;-) Actually I slept through it so I don't know if one can call it "experiencing". Greetings, Jeroen

9 11