June 2013 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Analysis Role Account 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, LacNOG, TRNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group. Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats(a)lists.apnic.net For historical data, please see http://thyme.rand.apnic.net. If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfsinoz(a)gmail.com>. Routing Table Report 04:00 +10GMT Sat 22 Jun, 2013 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 457502 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 186225 Deaggregation factor: 2.46 Unique aggregates announced to Internet: 227498 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 44356 Prefixes per ASN: 10.31 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 34763 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 16168 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 5859 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 143 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.6 Max AS path length visible: 29 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 36992) 22 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1392 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 609 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 4809 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 3734 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 10899 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 25 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 222 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2642684428 Equivalent to 157 /8s, 132 /16s and 42 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 71.4 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 71.4 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 94.6 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 160098 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 110296 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 33646 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.28 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 112510 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 46108 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 4852 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 23.19 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1220 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 819 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.8 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 25 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 583 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 725408992 Equivalent to 43 /8s, 60 /16s and 220 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 84.8 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 131072-133119 APNIC Address Blocks 1/8, 14/8, 27/8, 36/8, 39/8, 42/8, 43/8, 49/8, 58/8, 59/8, 60/8, 61/8, 101/8, 103/8, 106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8, 116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8, 123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8, 163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8, 222/8, 223/8, ARIN Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes: 158910 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 80418 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 1.98 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 159578 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 74067 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 15746 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 10.13 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 5994 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1644 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 4.1 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 27 Number of ARIN region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 19 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1081744192 Equivalent to 64 /8s, 122 /16s and 27 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 57.2 ARIN AS Blocks 1-1876, 1902-2042, 2044-2046, 2048-2106 (pre-ERX allocations) 2138-2584, 2615-2772, 2823-2829, 2880-3153 3354-4607, 4865-5119, 5632-6655, 6912-7466 7723-8191, 10240-12287, 13312-15359, 16384-17407 18432-20479, 21504-23551, 25600-26591, 26624-27647, 29696-30719, 31744-33791 35840-36863, 39936-40959, 46080-47103 53248-55295, 62464-63487, 393216-394239 ARIN Address Blocks 3/8, 4/8, 6/8, 7/8, 8/8, 9/8, 11/8, 12/8, 13/8, 15/8, 16/8, 17/8, 18/8, 19/8, 20/8, 21/8, 22/8, 23/8, 24/8, 26/8, 28/8, 29/8, 30/8, 32/8, 33/8, 34/8, 35/8, 38/8, 40/8, 44/8, 45/8, 47/8, 48/8, 50/8, 52/8, 53/8, 54/8, 55/8, 56/8, 57/8, 63/8, 64/8, 65/8, 66/8, 67/8, 68/8, 69/8, 70/8, 71/8, 72/8, 73/8, 74/8, 75/8, 76/8, 96/8, 97/8, 98/8, 99/8, 100/8, 104/8, 107/8, 108/8, 128/8, 129/8, 130/8, 131/8, 132/8, 134/8, 135/8, 136/8, 137/8, 138/8, 139/8, 140/8, 142/8, 143/8, 144/8, 146/8, 147/8, 148/8, 149/8, 152/8, 155/8, 156/8, 157/8, 158/8, 159/8, 160/8, 161/8, 162/8, 164/8, 165/8, 166/8, 167/8, 168/8, 169/8, 170/8, 172/8, 173/8, 174/8, 184/8, 192/8, 198/8, 199/8, 204/8, 205/8, 206/8, 207/8, 208/8, 209/8, 214/8, 215/8, 216/8, RIPE Region Analysis Summary ---------------------------- Prefixes being announced by RIPE Region ASes: 117878 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 60243 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 1.96 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 120804 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 78364 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 17245 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 7.01 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 8181 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2830 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 5.1 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 29 Number of RIPE region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 2360 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 656483940 Equivalent to 39 /8s, 33 /16s and 38 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 95.4 RIPE AS Blocks 1877-1901, 2043, 2047, 2107-2136, 2585-2614 (pre-ERX allocations) 2773-2822, 2830-2879, 3154-3353, 5377-5631 6656-6911, 8192-9215, 12288-13311, 15360-16383 20480-21503, 24576-25599, 28672-29695 30720-31743, 33792-35839, 38912-39935 40960-45055, 47104-52223, 56320-58367 59392-61439, 196608-199679 RIPE Address Blocks 2/8, 5/8, 25/8, 31/8, 37/8, 46/8, 51/8, 62/8, 77/8, 78/8, 79/8, 80/8, 81/8, 82/8, 83/8, 84/8, 85/8, 86/8, 87/8, 88/8, 89/8, 90/8, 91/8, 92/8, 93/8, 94/8, 95/8, 109/8, 141/8, 145/8, 151/8, 176/8, 178/8, 185/8, 188/8, 193/8, 194/8, 195/8, 212/8, 213/8, 217/8, LACNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------ Prefixes being announced by LACNIC Region ASes: 48510 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 9360 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 5.18 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 52885 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 24810 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1968 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 26.87 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 583 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 356 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.8 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 29 Number of LACNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 766 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 132418440 Equivalent to 7 /8s, 228 /16s and 139 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 78.9 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247, 61440-61951, 262144-263679 plus ERX transfers LACNIC Address Blocks 177/8, 179/8, 181/8, 186/8, 187/8, 189/8, 190/8, 191/8, 200/8, 201/8, AfriNIC Region Analysis Summary ------------------------------- Prefixes being announced by AfriNIC Region ASes: 10911 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 2517 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.33 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 11503 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 3944 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 640 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 17.97 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 190 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 131 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.8 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 25 Number of AfriNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 6 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 46313472 Equivalent to 2 /8s, 194 /16s and 176 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 46.0 AfriNIC AS Blocks 36864-37887, 327680-328703 & ERX transfers AfriNIC Address Blocks 41/8, 102/8, 105/8, 154/8, 196/8, 197/8, APNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 4766 2944 11561 922 Korea Telecom (KIX) 17974 2556 855 91 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 7545 2010 320 109 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 4755 1749 391 191 TATA Communications formerly 9829 1518 1205 40 BSNL National Internet Backbo 7552 1494 1082 9 Vietel Corporation 9583 1284 98 539 Sify Limited 4808 1146 2124 334 CNCGROUP IP network: China169 9498 1135 309 71 BHARTI Airtel Ltd. 24560 1077 394 164 Bharti Airtel Ltd., Telemedia Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-APNIC ARIN Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6389 2998 3691 73 bellsouth.net, inc. 18566 2064 382 184 Covad Communications 1785 1993 678 125 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 22773 1984 2927 123 Cox Communications, Inc. 20115 1666 1617 617 Charter Communications 4323 1623 1137 402 Time Warner Telecom 701 1533 11143 800 UUNET Technologies, Inc. 30036 1336 301 645 Mediacom Communications Corp 7018 1301 11039 832 AT&T WorldNet Services 11492 1221 217 360 Cable One Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-ARIN RIPE Region per AS prefix count summary --------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 8402 1686 544 16 Corbina telecom 34984 1279 244 222 BILISIM TELEKOM 2118 1069 97 13 EUnet/RELCOM Autonomous Syste 20940 890 308 697 Akamai Technologies European 13188 825 98 79 Educational Network 31148 805 40 25 FreeNet ISP 8551 772 370 44 Bezeq International 6830 765 2376 439 UPC Distribution Services 12479 684 789 57 Uni2 Autonomous System 34744 675 172 76 SC GVM SISTEM 2003 SRL Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-RIPE LACNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ----------------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 28573 2804 1558 107 NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A 10620 2662 418 209 TVCABLE BOGOTA 7303 1732 1155 221 Telecom Argentina Stet-France 8151 1257 2719 384 UniNet S.A. de C.V. 18881 1001 844 20 Global Village Telecom 6503 864 434 64 AVANTEL, S.A. 27947 840 89 105 Telconet S.A 3816 715 306 85 Empresa Nacional de Telecomun 7738 698 1370 35 Telecomunicacoes da Bahia S.A 6147 663 374 25 Telefonica Del Peru Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-LACNIC AfriNIC Region per AS prefix count summary ------------------------------------------ ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 36998 1237 80 4 MOBITEL 24863 883 274 30 LINKdotNET AS number 6713 542 617 25 Itissalat Al-MAGHRIB 8452 464 956 9 TEDATA 24835 344 80 8 RAYA Telecom - Egypt 3741 261 922 219 The Internet Solution 15706 222 32 6 Sudatel Internet Exchange Aut 29571 207 17 12 Ci Telecom Autonomous system 36992 198 527 21 Etisalat MISR 12258 193 28 66 Vodacom Internet Company Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet-AFRINIC Global Per AS prefix count summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets /20 equiv MaxAgg Description 6389 2998 3691 73 bellsouth.net, inc. 4766 2944 11561 922 Korea Telecom (KIX) 28573 2804 1558 107 NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A 10620 2662 418 209 TVCABLE BOGOTA 17974 2556 855 91 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 18566 2064 382 184 Covad Communications 7545 2010 320 109 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 1785 1993 678 125 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 22773 1984 2927 123 Cox Communications, Inc. 4755 1749 391 191 TATA Communications formerly Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 28573 2804 2697 NET Servicos de Comunicao S.A 17974 2556 2465 PT TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA 10620 2662 2453 TVCABLE BOGOTA 4766 2944 2022 Korea Telecom (KIX) 7545 2010 1901 TPG Internet Pty Ltd 18566 2064 1880 Covad Communications 1785 1993 1868 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 22773 1984 1861 Cox Communications, Inc. 8402 1686 1670 Corbina telecom 4755 1749 1558 TATA Communications formerly Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-CIDRnet List of Unregistered Origin ASNs (Global) ----------------------------------------- Bad AS Designation Network Transit AS Description 15132 UNALLOCATED 12.9.150.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 30031 UNALLOCATED 12.27.122.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 13317 UNALLOCATED 12.44.10.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 23502 UNALLOCATED 12.44.44.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 17300 UNALLOCATED 12.45.103.0/24 209 Qwest 17300 UNALLOCATED 12.45.110.0/24 701 UUNET Technologies, 16476 UNALLOCATED 12.46.27.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 14764 UNALLOCATED 12.108.237.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic 33649 UNALLOCATED 12.111.112.0/24 19029 New Edge Networks 26064 UNALLOCATED 12.149.37.0/24 7018 AT&T WorldNet Servic Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Prefixes from private and non-routed address space (Global) ----------------------------------------------------------- Prefix Origin AS Description 128.0.0.0/24 2876 Jump Management SRL 128.0.16.0/21 43568 RIPE Network Coordination Cen 128.0.24.0/21 41794 Altline LLC 128.0.46.0/23 39743 Mobimax Telecom SRL 128.0.53.0/24 60993 Totalsoft SA 128.0.54.0/24 60972 Carpatair SA 128.0.55.0/24 48571 SC efectRO SRL 128.0.57.0/24 60993 Totalsoft SA 128.0.58.0/23 9050 RTD-ROMTELECOM Autonomous Sys 128.0.60.0/24 9050 RTD-ROMTELECOM Autonomous Sys Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-dsua Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 62.61.220.0/24 24974 Tachyon Europe BV - Wireless 62.61.221.0/24 24974 Tachyon Europe BV - Wireless 64.185.224.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.225.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.226.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.227.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.228.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.229.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.230.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. 64.185.231.0/24 27431 JTL Networks Inc. Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-add-IANA Number of prefixes announced per prefix length (Global) ------------------------------------------------------- /1:0 /2:0 /3:0 /4:0 /5:0 /6:0 /7:0 /8:17 /9:11 /10:30 /11:91 /12:250 /13:483 /14:900 /15:1603 /16:12707 /17:6652 /18:11188 /19:22220 /20:32166 /21:34525 /22:47754 /23:42327 /24:240620 /25:1303 /26:1659 /27:849 /28:46 /29:65 /30:19 /31:0 /32:17 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 18566 2015 2064 Covad Communications 6389 1721 2998 bellsouth.net, inc. 8402 1382 1686 Corbina telecom 22773 1289 1984 Cox Communications, Inc. 36998 1231 1237 MOBITEL 30036 1203 1336 Mediacom Communications Corp 11492 1183 1221 Cable One 1785 1062 1993 PaeTec Communications, Inc. 6983 1011 1141 ITC^Deltacom 10620 992 2662 TVCABLE BOGOTA Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 1:832 2:836 3:3 4:19 5:800 6:15 8:557 12:1924 13:3 14:849 15:11 16:3 17:10 20:17 23:280 24:1769 27:1494 31:1262 32:43 33:2 34:5 36:47 37:1869 38:880 39:2 40:170 41:2780 42:202 44:8 46:1909 47:2 49:1322 50:734 52:12 54:35 55:7 57:26 58:1162 59:575 60:317 61:1411 62:1122 63:2027 64:4314 65:2159 66:4175 67:2073 68:1075 69:3271 70:856 71:489 72:1916 74:2475 75:322 76:303 77:1123 78:1028 79:612 80:1262 81:1008 82:624 83:582 84:540 85:1169 86:436 87:992 88:541 89:1747 90:147 91:5522 92:607 93:1721 94:1878 95:1668 96:515 97:346 98:1011 99:42 100:30 101:329 103:2834 105:517 106:142 107:207 108:513 109:1836 110:905 111:1060 112:546 113:814 114:712 115:973 116:980 117:841 118:1105 119:1323 120:388 121:733 122:1793 123:1214 124:1373 125:1419 128:638 129:223 130:310 131:662 132:358 133:155 134:268 135:67 136:223 137:245 138:350 139:192 140:210 141:330 142:532 143:382 144:500 145:94 146:507 147:380 148:670 149:348 150:157 151:533 152:420 153:189 154:23 155:414 156:270 157:397 158:279 159:727 160:344 161:448 162:451 163:222 164:604 165:498 166:243 167:596 168:1035 169:129 170:1052 171:181 172:21 173:1578 174:539 175:470 176:985 177:2083 178:1857 179:44 180:1457 181:466 182:1227 183:388 184:655 185:553 186:2268 187:1291 188:2147 189:1285 190:6802 192:6735 193:5671 194:4602 195:3438 196:1358 197:944 198:4494 199:5340 200:5988 201:2230 202:8827 203:8912 204:4516 205:2567 206:2801 207:2843 208:4055 209:3683 210:2943 211:1514 212:2181 213:1968 214:925 215:99 216:5310 217:1620 218:619 219:335 220:1306 221:553 222:325 223:457 End of report

1 0

Server Sky - Internet and computation in orbit
by Eugen Leitl 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

(This may be Wacky Friday, but this one is not tongue in cheek -- the name Keith Lofstrom should ring a bell). http://server-sky.com/ Server Sky - internet and computation in orbit It is easier to move terabits than kilograms or megawatts. Space solar power will solve the energy crisis. Sooner if we process space power into high value computation before we send it to earth. Computation is most valuable where it is rarest - in the rural developing world. Human attention is the most valuable resource on earth, and Server Sky space-based internet can transport that attention from where it is most abundant to where it is most valued. Click RecentChanges on any page to see what I've been working on lately. This website is a public work in progress - warts and all. Server Sky thinsats are ultralight films of glass that convert sunlight into computation and communications. Powered by solar cells, propelled and steered by light pressure, networked and located by microwaves, and cooled by radiation into deep space. Arrays of tens of thousands of thinsats act as highly redundant computation and database servers, as well as phased array antennas to reach thousands of transceivers on the ground. First generation thinsats are 20 centimeters across (about 8 inches) and 0.08 millimeters (80 microns) thick, and weigh 5 grams. They can be mass produced with off-the-shelf semiconductor and display technologies. Thousands of radio chips provide intra-array, inter-array, and ground communication, as well as precise location information. Thinsats are launched stacked by the thousands in solid cylinders, shrouded and vibration isolated inside a traditional satellite bus. Traditional data centers consume almost 3% of US electrical power, and this fraction is growing rapidly. Server arrays in orbit can grow to virtually unlimited computation power, communicate with the whole world, pay for themselves with electricity savings, and greatly reduce pollution and resource usage in the biosphere. The goal is an energy and space launch growth path that follows Moore's Law, with the cost of energy and launch halving every two years. Server Sky may cost two to ten times as much as ground-based computation in 2015, but is may cost 100 times less in 2035. The computation growth driven by Moore's Law is solving difficult problems from genetics to improved manufacture for semiconductors. If Server Sky and Moore's Law can do the same for clean energy, we can get rid of the carbon fuel plants, undam the rivers, and reduce atmospheric CO2 far sooner than we had dared hope. Energy production systems based on manual manufacturing, human construction assembly, and the use of terrestrial land, biological habitat, and surface water, packaged to survive weather, gravity, and corrosion, cannot grow at the same rate as Moore's Law. Server Sky is speculative. The most likely technical showstopper is radiation damage. The most likely practical showstopper is misunderstanding. Working together, we can fix the latter. Why Bother? 212 Acres and a Marble Thinsat Detailed Description Thinsat Propulsion and Navigation Deployment orbits Launching Thinsats from Earth Radios for communication, interconnect, synchronization, radar, and orientation The Space Environment - Radiation, Drag, Collisions, Erosion Manufacturing Thinsats Biological and Environmental Effects Future Possibilities - low cost launch, terascale arrays, beam power to Earth, scientific sensors Criticism Contact Us Participate . . . . Mailing List Signup] The Launch Loop, a speculative space launch system useful for launching Server Sky. This website is under construction - many of the sections need filling in. If you want to improve spelling, add expertise, etc... send me an ASCII (not html) email and I will add you to the editor's list.

1 0

Fwd: Re: This is a coordinated hacking. (Was Re: Need help in flushing DNS)
by Timothy Morizot 21 Jun '13

21 Jun '13

On Jun 20, 2013 5:31 PM, "Randy Bush" <randy(a)psg.com> wrote: > and dnssec did not save us. is there anything which could have? Hmmm. DNSSEC wouldn't have prevented an outage. But from everything I've seen reported, had the zones been signed, validating recursive resolvers (comcast, google, much of federal government, mine) would have returned servfail and would not have cached the bad nameservers in their good cache. Users would have simply failed to connect instead of being sent to the wrong page and recovery would have been quicker and easier. From my perspective as someone responsible for DNS at a fairly large enterprise, that would have been preferable. But then, the zones for which I'm responsible are signed. YMMV, Scott

2 2

Re: Need help in flushing DNS
by Brandon Butterworth 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

> Is there an organization that coordinates outages like this amongst the > industry? No, usually they are surprise outages though Anonymous have tried coordinating a few brandon

3 3

Wiki for people doing IPv6-only testing
by Jason Fesler 20 Jun '13

20 Jun '13

On a recent IPv6 providers call, there was a desire for participants to share information with each other on what works and what breaks in an IPv6-only environment. I offered to set that up. It was further suggested I should share this with more than just that small community; to anyone who might be doing work to test out IPv6-only scenarios. http://wiki.test-ipv6.com This is distinct from ARIN's wiki in so far that this is less about being a general IPv6 resource and more about the IPv6-only scenario resource. Contributions are welcome, but we're requiring folks to sign up before contributing to keep the spam down. -jfesler(a)gigo.com / jfesler(a)test-ipv6.com

2 1

If you thought you had wire management issues in your facilities...
by Tom Morris 19 Jun '13

19 Jun '13

Radio Free Asia, Washington DC. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=485799631503312&set=gm.536342003094… Just remember, you're probably in better shape than them. If you look carefully on the right side you can see where some cables were left abandoned in place because they'd become unremovable from that giant set of dreadlocks. -- -- Tom Morris, KG4CYX Mad Scientist For Hire Chairman, South Florida Tropical Hamboree / Miami Hamfest Engineer, WRGP Radiate FM, Florida International University 786-228-7087 151.820 Megacycles

3 2

RE: NANOG Digest, Vol 65, Issue 74
by Cliff Bowles 19 Jun '13

19 Jun '13

As stated, every vendor has its merits. If you really put some time into developing a list of requirements and then structure a bakeoff that tests those, you will learn a lot. Some things to think about: * don't let JUNOS or any other CLI deter you. You just need to factor in training and hiring efforts/costs. We switched to Juniper for 50+ campus routers (haven't used their switches yet) because they had way better bang for the buck. The engineers that whined about it not being Cisco were not the ones I cared to keep. The engineers that went out and learned JUNOS then slapped it on their resume were, by far, the more reliable and skilled engineers. Also, when you are hiring, I bet that you will find that engineers with substantial experience in other platforms will also perform very well on the technical interviews. They will probably know advanced BGP, MPLS, tunneling, multicast, QOS and other stuff that your average interviewee does not. It's a mindset. *politics: we replaced a large section of our network with Foundry (a price-per-port) decision. They worked as well as any vendor out there, but their support was... not polished as Cisco or Juniper. But the real problem came from the low level support engineers who had a CCNA and were Cisco-oriented. Now, when we had Cisco blade/power/code failures, it was a "network failure". When the Foundry had a problem, it was a "Foundry failure". I watched a huge outage due to a poor spanning tree design get branded as a Foundry issue. Management hears this enough and eventually we are told to replace the Foundry switches. I pulled ticket logs and proved that the support team had nearly twice the amount of open tickets and logged failures with Cisco as they did with Foundry, but it didn't matter. *politics again: If you are a big cisco shop and you decide to use another vendor somewhere, I GUARANTEE that a regional sales VP and some ducklings in suits will soon walk directly into the CIO's office. They will argue that the bakeoff was skewed, that price-per-port value doesn't factor in a lot of other value that cisco brings, they will even question the skillset of your engineers who performed the bakeoff, etc... they will instill Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt. They will offer another 2 or 3 % discount, they will throw in free professional services, and so on. Hell, they may put a Cisco employee on your board of directors. Short story - if there's a lot of money involved, you may wind up back with Cisco. I've seen it more than once That being said, I don't dislike Cisco at all. Their support is top notch and their training is pretty good. They take good care of their clients. A LOT of their products are good... some are not. But I did want to prepare you for the fun if you seriously consider another vendor. We have selected Mellanox for a small data warehouse, but that was a point solution due to the Infiniband requirements. We have selected Arista for a large Hadoop deployment. So far, they are a great product and a great value. Support seems good, but we haven't called them much yet. That's a good thing. One other thing to consider is future state and emerging technologies. If you are an architect or if you work with architecture to obtain design direction, ask about future needs for multi-tenancy, SDN, automation and such. I think you'll find that not only is Arista way out ahead of some vendors with this, they are using Open source code, more or less. Cisco has onePK, but their automation and API integration is not only proprietary, it's misleading. I haven't seen the other vendor solutions yet, so I can't say who is BEST at automation, orchestration, and SDN... So... determine what's important to your network today and in 3-5 years, then look at what's being offered. cwb -----Original Message----- From: nanog-request(a)nanog.org [mailto:nanog-request@nanog.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 8:18 PM To: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 65, Issue 74 Send NANOG mailing list submissions to nanog(a)nanog.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to nanog-request(a)nanog.org You can reach the person managing the list at nanog-owner(a)nanog.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... (Phil Fagan) 2. Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... (Mike Hale) 3. Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... (Phil Fagan) 4. Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... (Brent Jones) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:11:01 -0600 From: Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> To: Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List <blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> Cc: "NANOG \(nanog(a)nanog.org\)" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... Message-ID: <CAPhg-wRuiaopSV1PbkqaXjWHroi62cxEY=A=dQ7RGbo70K8E7w(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I've had nothing but good luck with Juniper support and well with Cisco you pay for support too. I will say Arista support was great, however, I'm still hesitant to put them in full production; but I think that is lack of experience with them speaking. Do the bake off in your lab and let'm run! On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote: > Let me also clarify, Price per port is not the final deciding factor. > We are looking much more at a combination of daily operational sanity, > troubleshooting features, operational feature set, vendor support > quality and price.**** > > ** ** > > Support is absolute key. When we need help, we need help quickly and > knowledgeable support. The name checkpoint comes to mind when I think > of something I DON?T want for support quality. It also causes > nausea?**** > > ** ** > > Thanks,**** > > ** ** > > Blake**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Phil Fagan [mailto:philfagan@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:08 PM > *To:* Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List > *Cc:* NANOG (nanog(a)nanog.org) > *Subject:* Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, > Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc...**** > > ** ** > > I love JUNOS, don't really care for IOS. I really trust Cisco and > Juniper's hardware, with that being said Arista is your best bet for > cheapest port. I've only seen Arista in lab, not in the wild yet so I > can't speak for how I would trust them. You mention getting bit by > single sups, I believe as of late Arista has had issue with OSPF > failover time between dual-sups in HA setups.**** > > ** ** > > I used to have a Dell laptop....but I'm sure their great too. In the > end for me I only trust Cisco or Juniper. I've been burnt by Foundry > and am waiting to on Arista. **** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < > blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote:**** > > Howdy, > I have been working on a proposal for the organization > I work for to move into the 10gbit datacenter. We have a small > datacenter currently of about 1000 ports of 1gbit. We have > traditionally been a full Cisco shop, however I was asked to do a > price comparison as well as features with other major alternative > vendors. I was also asked to do some digging as far as what "the real world" thinks about these possible vendors. > > We currently have 2 Cisco 6509's with 8 48 port cards Sup 3BXL, 2 > Cisco > 4506 with 5x 48 port card and Sup V's and 2 4900M switches providing > 10gbit to a very specialized implementation. With all of our > technology, we try to not be bleeding edge, but oozing edge. We need > 5 9's or more of uptime yearly so stability is preferable to cool > features. We currently have single supervisors in all of our switches > (not my decision) and it has bit us recently. Everything we are > looking at needs to support NSF/SSO/VSS of some kind. > > What we have been looking to replace it with in Cisco world is Nexus > 7004 Core and Nexus 5596UP with 2200 series Fabric extenders for > Dist/Access as well as 2200 Fabric Extenders within our Dell Blade > Chassis. Realistically we will be under 800 ports of 10gbit > (excluding Blades) which puts us in a tough spot from what I can find. > Currently everything we have is EOR, however TOR would make more sense > allowing us to switch to SFP+ twinax connectivity to servers. > > With this in mind, I have a few questions... > > It was mandated that I look at a company "Arista Networks" and > investigate possible options. I had not heard much about them, so I > look to the experts. Pro's and Con's? Real world experience? Looks > to me they have a lot of cool features, but I'm slightly concerned > with how new they might be, how reliable it would be as well as their > QA/bugfix history. Also 24x4 support and hardware replacement. > Everything in our datacenter currently has a 2 or 4 hour cisco > contract on it and critical core components have a cold spare in inventory. > > Dell Force 10... I know Dell tries to get you to drink the Koolaid on > this solution, I was a former Dell Partner and they even pushed me to > get demo equipment going... What's the experience with their chassis switches? > Stability? Configuration sanity? What do people like? What do > people hate? > > Juniper. What do people like? What do people hate? Have the Layer 2 > issues of historical age gone away? Is the config still xml ish? It > has been about 5 years since I worked with anything Juniper. > > Extreme networks. I know very little about them historically. What > is good, what is bad? Is the config sane? > > I would be happy to compile any information I find, as well as our > sanitized internal conclusions. On and off list responses welcome. > > If there is another vendor anyone would suggest, please add them to > the list with similarly asked questions. > > Thanks! > > Blake**** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- **** > > Phil Fagan**** > > Denver, CO**** > > 970-480-7618**** > -- Phil Fagan Denver, CO 970-480-7618 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:27:34 -0700 From: Mike Hale <eyeronic.design(a)gmail.com> To: Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> Cc: "NANOG \(nanog(a)nanog.org\)" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... Message-ID: <CAN3um4zC81=x8zc7_Q8e4Tr8bg1hMqEezX45qK5-=GOMVDe2pQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I'm exact opposite of Phil. I love IOS and hate JunOS....for that single reason, I'm really against buying Juniper in our shop for pretty much anything. :) Still, to be fair, the hardware seems to be really, really stable and well built. I don't think we've had a failure across our Junipers in the short time I've been with my day job. As far as support goes...the only time we had issues with our Nexus gear I was actually really, really disappointed with Cisco. We were upgrading our firmware, ran into some major issues with VPC and HSRP due some firmware changes, and the Tac engineer we got sucked *massive* lemons. When I call Tac with a situation like this, I expect someone who can code a working config from scratch based on the old config, not someone who's going to sit there scratching his head, running useless packet captures, and being silent when we ask questions. *sigh* /rant off On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I've had nothing but good luck with Juniper support and well with Cisco you > pay for support too. I will say Arista support was great, however, I'm > still hesitant to put them in full production; but I think that is lack of > experience with them speaking. > > Do the bake off in your lab and let'm run! > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < > blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote: > >> Let me also clarify, Price per port is not the final deciding factor. >> We are looking much more at a combination of daily operational sanity, >> troubleshooting features, operational feature set, vendor support quality >> and price.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Support is absolute key. When we need help, we need help quickly and >> knowledgeable support. The name checkpoint comes to mind when I think of >> something I DON?T want for support quality. It also causes nausea?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Thanks,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Blake**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Phil Fagan [mailto:philfagan@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:08 PM >> *To:* Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List >> *Cc:* NANOG (nanog(a)nanog.org) >> *Subject:* Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell >> Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc...**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I love JUNOS, don't really care for IOS. I really trust Cisco and >> Juniper's hardware, with that being said Arista is your best bet for >> cheapest port. I've only seen Arista in lab, not in the wild yet so I can't >> speak for how I would trust them. You mention getting bit by single sups, I >> believe as of late Arista has had issue with OSPF failover time between >> dual-sups in HA setups.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I used to have a Dell laptop....but I'm sure their great too. In the end >> for me I only trust Cisco or Juniper. I've been burnt by Foundry and am >> waiting to on Arista. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < >> blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote:**** >> >> Howdy, >> I have been working on a proposal for the organization I >> work for to move into the 10gbit datacenter. We have a small datacenter >> currently of about 1000 ports of 1gbit. We have traditionally been a full >> Cisco shop, however I was asked to do a price comparison as well as >> features with other major alternative vendors. I was also asked to do some >> digging as far as what "the real world" thinks about these possible vendors. >> >> We currently have 2 Cisco 6509's with 8 48 port cards Sup 3BXL, 2 Cisco >> 4506 with 5x 48 port card and Sup V's and 2 4900M switches providing 10gbit >> to a very specialized implementation. With all of our technology, we try >> to not be bleeding edge, but oozing edge. We need 5 9's or more of uptime >> yearly so stability is preferable to cool features. We currently have >> single supervisors in all of our switches (not my decision) and it has bit >> us recently. Everything we are looking at needs to support NSF/SSO/VSS of >> some kind. >> >> What we have been looking to replace it with in Cisco world is Nexus 7004 >> Core and Nexus 5596UP with 2200 series Fabric extenders for Dist/Access as >> well as 2200 Fabric Extenders within our Dell Blade Chassis. Realistically >> we will be under 800 ports of 10gbit (excluding Blades) which puts us in a >> tough spot from what I can find. Currently everything we have is EOR, >> however TOR would make more sense allowing us to switch to SFP+ twinax >> connectivity to servers. >> >> With this in mind, I have a few questions... >> >> It was mandated that I look at a company "Arista Networks" and investigate >> possible options. I had not heard much about them, so I look to the >> experts. Pro's and Con's? Real world experience? Looks to me they have a >> lot of cool features, but I'm slightly concerned with how new they might >> be, how reliable it would be as well as their QA/bugfix history. Also 24x4 >> support and hardware replacement. Everything in our datacenter currently >> has a 2 or 4 hour cisco contract on it and critical core components have a >> cold spare in inventory. >> >> Dell Force 10... I know Dell tries to get you to drink the Koolaid on this >> solution, I was a former Dell Partner and they even pushed me to get demo >> equipment going... What's the experience with their chassis switches? >> Stability? Configuration sanity? What do people like? What do people >> hate? >> >> Juniper. What do people like? What do people hate? Have the Layer 2 >> issues of historical age gone away? Is the config still xml ish? It has >> been about 5 years since I worked with anything Juniper. >> >> Extreme networks. I know very little about them historically. What is >> good, what is bad? Is the config sane? >> >> I would be happy to compile any information I find, as well as our >> sanitized internal conclusions. On and off list responses welcome. >> >> If there is another vendor anyone would suggest, please add them to the >> list with similarly asked questions. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Blake**** >> >> >> >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> -- **** >> >> Phil Fagan**** >> >> Denver, CO**** >> >> 970-480-7618**** >> > > > > -- > Phil Fagan > Denver, CO > 970-480-7618 -- 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:14:18 -0600 From: Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> To: Mike Hale <eyeronic.design(a)gmail.com> Cc: "NANOG \(nanog(a)nanog.org\)" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... Message-ID: <CAPhg-wT=5_CeH3e9J2zo67TKMVYLmmx3fCWoDMxBV93csCfedQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Mike brings up a good point though; the effort, cost, and risk of introducing a new CLI to an environment sometimes is masked until you really need to dig in and work through outages. Familiarity with a codebase or at least with how the code "thinks" should go a long way when deciding what to put in your racks. Of course, how do you quantify that? On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Mike Hale <eyeronic.design(a)gmail.com>wrote: > I'm exact opposite of Phil. I love IOS and hate JunOS....for that > single reason, I'm really against buying Juniper in our shop for > pretty much anything. :) > > Still, to be fair, the hardware seems to be really, really stable and > well built. I don't think we've had a failure across our Junipers in > the short time I've been with my day job. > > As far as support goes...the only time we had issues with our Nexus > gear I was actually really, really disappointed with Cisco. We were > upgrading our firmware, ran into some major issues with VPC and HSRP > due some firmware changes, and the Tac engineer we got sucked > *massive* lemons. When I call Tac with a situation like this, I > expect someone who can code a working config from scratch based on the > old config, not someone who's going to sit there scratching his head, > running useless packet captures, and being silent when we ask > questions. *sigh* > > /rant off > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I've had nothing but good luck with Juniper support and well with Cisco > you > > pay for support too. I will say Arista support was great, however, I'm > > still hesitant to put them in full production; but I think that is lack > of > > experience with them speaking. > > > > Do the bake off in your lab and let'm run! > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < > > blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote: > > > >> Let me also clarify, Price per port is not the final deciding factor. > >> We are looking much more at a combination of daily operational sanity, > >> troubleshooting features, operational feature set, vendor support > quality > >> and price.**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> Support is absolute key. When we need help, we need help quickly and > >> knowledgeable support. The name checkpoint comes to mind when I think > of > >> something I DON?T want for support quality. It also causes nausea?**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> Thanks,**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> Blake**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> *From:* Phil Fagan [mailto:philfagan@gmail.com] > >> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:08 PM > >> *To:* Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List > >> *Cc:* NANOG (nanog(a)nanog.org) > >> *Subject:* Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell > >> Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc...**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> I love JUNOS, don't really care for IOS. I really trust Cisco and > >> Juniper's hardware, with that being said Arista is your best bet for > >> cheapest port. I've only seen Arista in lab, not in the wild yet so I > can't > >> speak for how I would trust them. You mention getting bit by single > sups, I > >> believe as of late Arista has had issue with OSPF failover time between > >> dual-sups in HA setups.**** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> I used to have a Dell laptop....but I'm sure their great too. In the end > >> for me I only trust Cisco or Juniper. I've been burnt by Foundry and am > >> waiting to on Arista. **** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < > >> blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote:**** > >> > >> Howdy, > >> I have been working on a proposal for the organization I > >> work for to move into the 10gbit datacenter. We have a small datacenter > >> currently of about 1000 ports of 1gbit. We have traditionally been a > full > >> Cisco shop, however I was asked to do a price comparison as well as > >> features with other major alternative vendors. I was also asked to do > some > >> digging as far as what "the real world" thinks about these possible > vendors. > >> > >> We currently have 2 Cisco 6509's with 8 48 port cards Sup 3BXL, 2 Cisco > >> 4506 with 5x 48 port card and Sup V's and 2 4900M switches providing > 10gbit > >> to a very specialized implementation. With all of our technology, we > try > >> to not be bleeding edge, but oozing edge. We need 5 9's or more of > uptime > >> yearly so stability is preferable to cool features. We currently have > >> single supervisors in all of our switches (not my decision) and it has > bit > >> us recently. Everything we are looking at needs to support NSF/SSO/VSS > of > >> some kind. > >> > >> What we have been looking to replace it with in Cisco world is Nexus > 7004 > >> Core and Nexus 5596UP with 2200 series Fabric extenders for Dist/Access > as > >> well as 2200 Fabric Extenders within our Dell Blade Chassis. > Realistically > >> we will be under 800 ports of 10gbit (excluding Blades) which puts us > in a > >> tough spot from what I can find. Currently everything we have is EOR, > >> however TOR would make more sense allowing us to switch to SFP+ twinax > >> connectivity to servers. > >> > >> With this in mind, I have a few questions... > >> > >> It was mandated that I look at a company "Arista Networks" and > investigate > >> possible options. I had not heard much about them, so I look to the > >> experts. Pro's and Con's? Real world experience? Looks to me they > have a > >> lot of cool features, but I'm slightly concerned with how new they might > >> be, how reliable it would be as well as their QA/bugfix history. Also > 24x4 > >> support and hardware replacement. Everything in our datacenter > currently > >> has a 2 or 4 hour cisco contract on it and critical core components > have a > >> cold spare in inventory. > >> > >> Dell Force 10... I know Dell tries to get you to drink the Koolaid on > this > >> solution, I was a former Dell Partner and they even pushed me to get > demo > >> equipment going... What's the experience with their chassis switches? > >> Stability? Configuration sanity? What do people like? What do people > >> hate? > >> > >> Juniper. What do people like? What do people hate? Have the Layer 2 > >> issues of historical age gone away? Is the config still xml ish? It > has > >> been about 5 years since I worked with anything Juniper. > >> > >> Extreme networks. I know very little about them historically. What is > >> good, what is bad? Is the config sane? > >> > >> I would be happy to compile any information I find, as well as our > >> sanitized internal conclusions. On and off list responses welcome. > >> > >> If there is another vendor anyone would suggest, please add them to the > >> list with similarly asked questions. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Blake**** > >> > >> > >> > >> **** > >> > >> ** ** > >> > >> -- **** > >> > >> Phil Fagan**** > >> > >> Denver, CO**** > >> > >> 970-480-7618**** > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Phil Fagan > > Denver, CO > > 970-480-7618 > > > > -- > 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 > -- Phil Fagan Denver, CO 970-480-7618 ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:17:51 -0700 From: Brent Jones <brent(a)brentrjones.com> To: Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List <blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> Cc: "NANOG \(nanog(a)nanog.org\)" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Re: Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc... Message-ID: <CAOC=LuXYFJJ+xRUSQ50yfYrYtQA5uqBnAvxCB8+gwASpU5s7aw(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List < blake.mailinglist(a)pfankuch.me> wrote: > Howdy, > I have been working on a proposal for the organization I > work for to move into the 10gbit datacenter. We have a small datacenter > currently of about 1000 ports of 1gbit. We have traditionally been a full > Cisco shop, however I was asked to do a price comparison as well as > features with other major alternative vendors. I was also asked to do some > digging as far as what "the real world" thinks about these possible vendors. > > We currently have 2 Cisco 6509's with 8 48 port cards Sup 3BXL, 2 Cisco > 4506 with 5x 48 port card and Sup V's and 2 4900M switches providing 10gbit > to a very specialized implementation. With all of our technology, we try > to not be bleeding edge, but oozing edge. We need 5 9's or more of uptime > yearly so stability is preferable to cool features. We currently have > single supervisors in all of our switches (not my decision) and it has bit > us recently. Everything we are looking at needs to support NSF/SSO/VSS of > some kind. > > What we have been looking to replace it with in Cisco world is Nexus 7004 > Core and Nexus 5596UP with 2200 series Fabric extenders for Dist/Access as > well as 2200 Fabric Extenders within our Dell Blade Chassis. Realistically > we will be under 800 ports of 10gbit (excluding Blades) which puts us in a > tough spot from what I can find. Currently everything we have is EOR, > however TOR would make more sense allowing us to switch to SFP+ twinax > connectivity to servers. > > With this in mind, I have a few questions... > > It was mandated that I look at a company "Arista Networks" and investigate > possible options. I had not heard much about them, so I look to the > experts. Pro's and Con's? Real world experience? Looks to me they have a > lot of cool features, but I'm slightly concerned with how new they might > be, how reliable it would be as well as their QA/bugfix history. Also 24x4 > support and hardware replacement. Everything in our datacenter currently > has a 2 or 4 hour cisco contract on it and critical core components have a > cold spare in inventory. > > Dell Force 10... I know Dell tries to get you to drink the Koolaid on this > solution, I was a former Dell Partner and they even pushed me to get demo > equipment going... What's the experience with their chassis switches? > Stability? Configuration sanity? What do people like? What do people > hate? > > Juniper. What do people like? What do people hate? Have the Layer 2 > issues of historical age gone away? Is the config still xml ish? It has > been about 5 years since I worked with anything Juniper. > > Extreme networks. I know very little about them historically. What is > good, what is bad? Is the config sane? > > I would be happy to compile any information I find, as well as our > sanitized internal conclusions. On and off list responses welcome. > > If there is another vendor anyone would suggest, please add them to the > list with similarly asked questions. > > Thanks! > > Blake > Coming from first hand experience, all network equipment vendors have strengths and weaknesses. Personally, I prefer the Junos CLI and ecosystem, but it is a learning curve, especially with a larger team who may not be familiar with it. But I found once I grasped the "Junos way", I'm significantly more productive with less errors, and "commit confirmed" is much better than Cisco comparable rollback methods. Juniper also offers several methods for automation: Junoscript/SLAX, Netconf, and now Puppet integration. I also have experience with Force10, and minor experience with Arista, both good vendors. They will be immieditely familiar to your team, since they use the same commands mostly. I find Juniper's virtual chassis to be among the better stacking technologies, but everyone has their own take. Force10 and Arista do really good multi-chassis LAG, as well as the Juniper QFX lineup. These days, vendors are really competitive on pricing and offerings, so you really can't go wrong :) -- Brent Jones brent(a)brentrjones.com End of NANOG Digest, Vol 65, Issue 74 ************************************* This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system.

1 0

Network Vendor suggestions/reviews, Arista Networks, Dell Force10, Juniper, Extreme Networks etc...
by Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List 19 Jun '13

19 Jun '13

Howdy, I have been working on a proposal for the organization I work for to move into the 10gbit datacenter. We have a small datacenter currently of about 1000 ports of 1gbit. We have traditionally been a full Cisco shop, however I was asked to do a price comparison as well as features with other major alternative vendors. I was also asked to do some digging as far as what "the real world" thinks about these possible vendors. We currently have 2 Cisco 6509's with 8 48 port cards Sup 3BXL, 2 Cisco 4506 with 5x 48 port card and Sup V's and 2 4900M switches providing 10gbit to a very specialized implementation. With all of our technology, we try to not be bleeding edge, but oozing edge. We need 5 9's or more of uptime yearly so stability is preferable to cool features. We currently have single supervisors in all of our switches (not my decision) and it has bit us recently. Everything we are looking at needs to support NSF/SSO/VSS of some kind. What we have been looking to replace it with in Cisco world is Nexus 7004 Core and Nexus 5596UP with 2200 series Fabric extenders for Dist/Access as well as 2200 Fabric Extenders within our Dell Blade Chassis. Realistically we will be under 800 ports of 10gbit (excluding Blades) which puts us in a tough spot from what I can find. Currently everything we have is EOR, however TOR would make more sense allowing us to switch to SFP+ twinax connectivity to servers. With this in mind, I have a few questions... It was mandated that I look at a company "Arista Networks" and investigate possible options. I had not heard much about them, so I look to the experts. Pro's and Con's? Real world experience? Looks to me they have a lot of cool features, but I'm slightly concerned with how new they might be, how reliable it would be as well as their QA/bugfix history. Also 24x4 support and hardware replacement. Everything in our datacenter currently has a 2 or 4 hour cisco contract on it and critical core components have a cold spare in inventory. Dell Force 10... I know Dell tries to get you to drink the Koolaid on this solution, I was a former Dell Partner and they even pushed me to get demo equipment going... What's the experience with their chassis switches? Stability? Configuration sanity? What do people like? What do people hate? Juniper. What do people like? What do people hate? Have the Layer 2 issues of historical age gone away? Is the config still xml ish? It has been about 5 years since I worked with anything Juniper. Extreme networks. I know very little about them historically. What is good, what is bad? Is the config sane? I would be happy to compile any information I find, as well as our sanitized internal conclusions. On and off list responses welcome. If there is another vendor anyone would suggest, please add them to the list with similarly asked questions. Thanks! Blake

10 13

Re: [afnog] gTLDs opened up
by Randy Bush 19 Jun '13

19 Jun '13

> How is AFRINIC responsible of that? >> AfriNIC put these wonderful people on stage at the African Internet >> Summit. afrinic put them on the stage. it is said because you needed to fill slots in the program, but i really do not know why or care. randy

1 0

Re: 10gig coast to coast
by Jakob Heitz 19 Jun '13

19 Jun '13

> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:04:52 -0600 > From: Phil Fagan <philfagan(a)gmail.com> > ... you could always > thread the crap out of whatever it is your transactioning across the link > to make up for TCP's jackknifes... What is a TCP jackknife? Cheers. Jakob.

6 8