April 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: rack cable length
by Brandon Butterworth 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

> From: "Bob Evans" <bob(a)FiberInternetCenter.com> > You must build them if you want the professional look. No way around that > - unless you want to take up rack space with some sort of cable management > wrapping system and that becomes a pain to make future changes or replace > cables. Re lacing is as much a pain (if you want to keep it looking professional) brandon

1 0

Weekly Routing Table Report
by Routing Analysis Role Account 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

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, 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 18 Apr, 2015 Report Website: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net Detailed Analysis: http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/ Analysis Summary ---------------- BGP routing table entries examined: 540786 Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS): 206550 Deaggregation factor: 2.62 Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets): 263869 Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 50040 Prefixes per ASN: 10.81 Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 36566 Origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 16289 Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 6330 Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 176 Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table: 4.4 Max AS path length visible: 45 Max AS path prepend of ASN ( 55944) 41 Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 1189 Unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table: 415 Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs: 9182 Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 7144 Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table: 25731 Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 2 Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table: 0 Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space: 363 Number of addresses announced to Internet: 2739671460 Equivalent to 163 /8s, 76 /16s and 17 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 74.0 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 74.0 Percentage of available address space allocated: 100.0 Percentage of address space in use by end-sites: 97.3 Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 182096 APNIC Region Analysis Summary ----------------------------- Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes: 133387 Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 38870 APNIC Deaggregation factor: 3.43 Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks: 139137 Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks: 56770 APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 5035 APNIC Prefixes per ASN: 27.63 APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 1204 APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 872 Average APNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.4 Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 45 Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 1385 Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet: 747587072 Equivalent to 44 /8s, 143 /16s and 70 /24s Percentage of available APNIC address space announced: 87.4 APNIC AS Blocks 4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431 (pre-ERX allocations) 23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319, 58368-59391, 63488-64098, 131072-135580 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: 178405 Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation: 87876 ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.03 Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks: 180813 Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks: 84713 ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 16543 ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 10.93 ARIN Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 6081 ARIN Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 1726 Average ARIN Region AS path length visible: 3.8 Max ARIN Region AS path length visible: 24 Number of ARIN region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 402 Number of ARIN addresses announced to Internet: 1064773152 Equivalent to 63 /8s, 119 /16s and 38 /24s Percentage of available ARIN address space announced: 56.3 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: 131149 Total RIPE prefixes after maximum aggregation: 65580 RIPE Deaggregation factor: 2.00 Prefixes being announced from the RIPE address blocks: 137384 Unique aggregates announced from the RIPE address blocks: 84757 RIPE Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 17947 RIPE Prefixes per ASN: 7.65 RIPE Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 8171 RIPE Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2987 Average RIPE Region AS path length visible: 4.9 Max RIPE Region AS path length visible: 34 Number of RIPE region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 3613 Number of RIPE addresses announced to Internet: 693973636 Equivalent to 41 /8s, 93 /16s and 50 /24s Percentage of available RIPE address space announced: 100.9 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, 61952-62463, 196608-202239 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: 59161 Total LACNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 11164 LACNIC Deaggregation factor: 5.30 Prefixes being announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 69111 Unique aggregates announced from the LACNIC address blocks: 32165 LACNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 2429 LACNIC Prefixes per ASN: 28.45 LACNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 630 LACNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 499 Average LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.9 Max LACNIC Region AS path length visible: 23 Number of LACNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 1636 Number of LACNIC addresses announced to Internet: 168062720 Equivalent to 10 /8s, 4 /16s and 111 /24s Percentage of available LACNIC address space announced: 100.2 LACNIC AS Blocks 26592-26623, 27648-28671, 52224-53247, 61440-61951, 64099-64197, 262144-265628 + 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: 12783 Total AfriNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation: 3016 AfriNIC Deaggregation factor: 4.24 Prefixes being announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 13978 Unique aggregates announced from the AfriNIC address blocks: 5137 AfriNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 736 AfriNIC Prefixes per ASN: 18.99 AfriNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix: 203 AfriNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 162 Average AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 4.5 Max AfriNIC Region AS path length visible: 24 Number of AfriNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table: 108 Number of AfriNIC addresses announced to Internet: 64834816 Equivalent to 3 /8s, 221 /16s and 77 /24s Percentage of available AfriNIC address space announced: 64.4 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 2920 11557 912 Korea Telecom 17974 2792 904 78 PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia 7545 2555 336 128 TPG Telecom Limited 4755 2004 422 212 TATA Communications formerly 4538 1760 4190 71 China Education and Research 9829 1660 1326 39 National Internet Backbone 9808 1570 8717 28 Guangdong Mobile Communicatio 4808 1442 2244 447 CNCGROUP IP network China169 9583 1407 116 575 Sify Limited 9498 1320 334 94 BHARTI Airtel Ltd. 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 22773 3017 2956 143 Cox Communications Inc. 6389 2842 3688 51 BellSouth.net Inc. 3356 2560 10700 489 Level 3 Communications, Inc. 18566 2039 379 182 MegaPath Corporation 20115 1876 1832 430 Charter Communications 6983 1754 866 245 EarthLink, Inc. 4323 1616 1020 407 tw telecom holdings, inc. 30036 1517 309 509 Mediacom Communications Corp 701 1409 11276 693 MCI Communications Services, 22561 1341 412 243 CenturyTel Internet Holdings, 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 39891 2472 128 6 SaudiNet, Saudi Telecom Compa 34984 1957 303 365 TELLCOM ILETISIM HIZMETLERI A 20940 1793 699 1326 Akamai International B.V. 6849 1212 356 24 JSC "Ukrtelecom" 8402 1124 544 15 OJSC "Vimpelcom" 31148 1046 45 21 Freenet Ltd. 13188 1034 96 71 TOV "Bank-Inform" 12479 902 863 85 France Telecom Espana SA 8551 886 373 48 Bezeq International-Ltd 6830 855 2345 453 Liberty Global Operations B.V 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 10620 3197 520 192 Telmex Colombia S.A. 28573 2339 2179 122 NET Serviços de Comunicação S 7303 1694 1087 238 Telecom Argentina S.A. 6147 1625 374 30 Telefonica del Peru S.A.A. 8151 1590 3187 454 Uninet S.A. de C.V. 6503 1237 421 57 Axtel, S.A.B. de C.V. 7738 999 1882 41 Telemar Norte Leste S.A. 26615 982 2325 35 Tim Celular S.A. 3816 923 418 154 COLOMBIA TELECOMUNICACIONES S 18881 866 1036 22 Global Village Telecom 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 8452 1703 958 13 TE-AS 24863 964 284 27 Link Egypt (Link.NET) 36903 492 248 93 Office National des Postes et 36992 417 1229 32 ETISALAT MISR 37492 302 155 72 Orange Tunisie 24835 300 144 9 Vodafone Data 3741 249 857 208 Internet Solutions 29571 231 21 12 Cote d'Ivoire Telecom 36947 198 807 13 Telecom Algeria 15706 172 32 6 Sudatel (Sudan Telecom Co. Lt 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 10620 3197 520 192 Telmex Colombia S.A. 22773 3017 2956 143 Cox Communications Inc. 4766 2920 11557 912 Korea Telecom 6389 2842 3688 51 BellSouth.net Inc. 17974 2792 904 78 PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia 3356 2560 10700 489 Level 3 Communications, Inc. 7545 2555 336 128 TPG Telecom Limited 39891 2472 128 6 SaudiNet, Saudi Telecom Compa 28573 2339 2179 122 NET Serviços de Comunicação S 18566 2039 379 182 MegaPath Corporation Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-ASnet Global Per AS Maximum Aggr summary ---------------------------------- ASN No of nets Net Savings Description 22773 3017 2874 Cox Communications Inc. 6389 2842 2791 BellSouth.net Inc. 17974 2792 2714 PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia 39891 2472 2466 SaudiNet, Saudi Telecom Compa 7545 2555 2427 TPG Telecom Limited 28573 2339 2217 NET Serviços de Comunicação S 3356 2560 2071 Level 3 Communications, Inc. 4766 2920 2008 Korea Telecom 18566 2039 1857 MegaPath Corporation 4755 2004 1792 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 30662 UNALLOCATED 8.2.129.0/24 3356 Level 3 Communicatio 53506 UNALLOCATED 8.17.102.0/23 3356 Level 3 Communicatio 46467 UNALLOCATED 8.19.192.0/24 46887 Lightower Fiber Netw 18985 UNALLOCATED 8.21.68.0/22 3356 Level 3 Communicatio 46473 UNALLOCATED 8.27.122.0/24 12180 Internap Network Ser 46473 UNALLOCATED 8.27.124.0/24 12180 Internap Network Ser 27205 UNALLOCATED 8.38.16.0/21 6461 Abovenet Communicati 15347 UNALLOCATED 8.224.147.0/24 12064 Cox Communications I 33628 UNALLOCATED 12.0.239.0/24 1239 Sprint 32805 UNALLOCATED 12.1.225.0/24 7018 AT&T Services, Inc. Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-badAS Advertised Unallocated Addresses -------------------------------- Network Origin AS Description 5.100.241.0/24 23456 32bit Transition AS 23.226.112.0/20 62788 >>UNKNOWN<< 27.100.7.0/24 56096 >>UNKNOWN<< 31.217.248.0/21 44902 COVAGE NETWORKS SASU 41.73.1.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.73.10.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.73.11.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.73.12.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.73.13.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 41.73.15.0/24 37004 >>UNKNOWN<< 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 /8:16 /9:12 /10:34 /11:94 /12:262 /13:508 /14:998 /15:1719 /16:12953 /17:7200 /18:12211 /19:25344 /20:35909 /21:38551 /22:58855 /23:51392 /24:291715 /25:1130 /26:1129 /27:708 /28:14 /29:11 /30:8 /31:0 /32:13 Advertised prefixes smaller than registry allocations ----------------------------------------------------- ASN No of nets Total ann. Description 39891 2432 2472 SaudiNet, Saudi Telecom Compa 22773 2225 3017 Cox Communications Inc. 18566 1995 2039 MegaPath Corporation 6389 1657 2842 BellSouth.net Inc. 6983 1401 1754 EarthLink, Inc. 30036 1362 1517 Mediacom Communications Corp 34984 1283 1957 TELLCOM ILETISIM HIZMETLERI A 6147 1171 1625 Telefonica del Peru S.A.A. 10620 1131 3197 Telmex Colombia S.A. 11492 1106 1173 CABLE ONE, INC. Complete listing at http://thyme.rand.apnic.net/current/data-sXXas-nos Number of /24s announced per /8 block (Global) ---------------------------------------------- 1:1484 2:670 4:93 5:1743 6:23 8:1414 12:1825 13:9 14:1308 15:17 16:2 17:44 18:21 20:48 23:1202 24:1718 27:1880 31:1526 32:38 33:2 34:5 35:3 36:117 37:1898 38:1019 39:5 40:252 41:3001 42:267 43:1245 44:25 45:441 46:2110 47:38 49:844 50:800 52:12 54:73 55:4 56:8 57:37 58:1221 59:674 60:469 61:1751 62:1327 63:1915 64:4424 65:2251 66:4090 67:2069 68:1078 69:3270 70:960 71:445 72:1955 74:2658 75:323 76:403 77:1457 78:1188 79:801 80:1299 81:1345 82:815 83:688 84:710 85:1372 86:395 87:1075 88:509 89:1821 90:151 91:5979 92:831 93:2212 94:1984 95:2091 96:430 97:355 98:1059 99:48 100:68 101:815 103:7218 104:1580 105:62 106:244 107:931 108:621 109:2024 110:1088 111:1491 112:782 113:1065 114:810 115:1260 116:1364 117:999 118:1752 119:1446 120:453 121:1037 122:2216 123:1753 124:1509 125:1588 128:541 129:379 130:386 131:1178 132:488 133:174 134:418 135:109 136:307 137:326 138:629 139:151 140:242 141:421 142:657 143:517 144:572 145:112 146:715 147:589 148:1120 149:432 150:572 151:606 152:492 153:242 154:441 155:744 156:407 157:462 158:318 159:985 160:376 161:646 162:1954 163:419 164:670 165:682 166:288 167:805 168:1282 169:162 170:1468 171:240 172:41 173:1529 174:706 175:676 176:1353 177:3771 178:2067 179:880 180:1940 181:1666 182:1731 183:619 184:740 185:3301 186:2644 187:1765 188:2022 189:1562 190:7639 191:950 192:8266 193:5582 194:4124 195:3657 196:1715 197:1086 198:5531 199:5531 200:6522 201:3043 202:9468 203:9104 204:4692 205:2840 206:3098 207:2980 208:3939 209:3942 210:3515 211:1859 212:2461 213:2289 214:855 215:71 216:5571 217:1802 218:685 219:455 220:1442 221:787 222:466 223:666 End of report

1 0

Looking for core L3 switch for campus network; feedback on Juniper EX8208?
by Israel G. Lugo 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

Hello, I'm thinking of buying a Juniper EX8208 to serve as the core L3 switch on an collapsed campus network (faculty, academia). Rough figures: around 6,000 eyeballs, up to around 10,000 MACs, spread over some 30 buildings of varying size. OM2/OM3 fiber from the buildings to the core, using 1Gb optics. Planning to upgrade to monomode within 2 years and may migrate some buildings to 10 Gb. >From the spec sheets, the EX8208 seems to fit the bill. It will be teaming up with an older Alcatel L3 switch, which will work as backup. VRRP, OSPF, MSTP. It'll be replacing another Alcatel L3 switch that we're sending back due to way too many bugs and reliability issues over the 1.5 year span that we had it. We are fully IPv6 dual-stack (for over 10 years now), so this needs to support fully working OSPFv3, VRRPv3, MLD and so on. According to the manuals for the EX line, that seems to be the case (with some limitations regarding OSPFv3, it seems). Access and aggregation switches are mostly Alcatel. There are a few other routers for VLANs with specific requirements (NAT, firewalling, etc). All using OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. I'd welcome any feedback regarding the EX820x, positive or negative. Bugs, support quality, stability issues, scalability, IPv6 support... I could go up to the EX9200 if necessary. I've had very good experience with the SRX2x0 line in a separate setting, and Juniper TAC in general always seemed quite good. Of course the EX8200 is a different ballpark so things may be different. I'm curious for example: as a switch, I'd expect the EX8200 to work in packet mode, yes? Or does it have flowd and its security {...} section? I wouldn't really use the flow features at this level and wouldn't like to have it there waiting to catch a bug from some weird packets thrown at it. Thank you for reading. Regards, Israel G. Lugo

1 0

Galaxy S6 is IPv6 on all US National Mobile carriers
by Ca By 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

Good news (that i have not personally verified) ! Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T all launched the Samsung Galaxy S6 with IPv6 on by default. Given the growth and importance of mobile to Internet, it is great to see this progress from the mobile carriers. Just for those keeping score, of the top 10 Alexa website for the USA, these major websites prefer IPv6 or prefer NAT44 / NAT64 from the mobile networks 1. Google -- prefers IPv6 2. Facebook -- prefers IPv6 3. Youtube -- prefers IPv6 4. Amazon -- prefers NAT -- :( 5. Yahoo! -- prefers IPv6 6. Wikipedia -- prefers IPv6 7. Twitter -- prefers NAT -- :( 8. Ebay -- prefers NAT -- :( 9. Linkedin -- prefers IPv6 10. Reddit -- prefers NAT -- :( Dear Amazon, Twitter, Ebay, and Reddit -- please consider this your personal invitation to introduce IPv6 to your service.

17 23

Re: Low cost WDM gear
by Kenneth McRae 17 Apr '15

17 Apr '15

Michelle speaks English. On Apr 16, 2015, at 09:04 AM, Justin Wilson - MTIN <lists(a)mtin.net> wrote: Does anyone have a English speaking rep for FiberStore? I have a client with a difficult time ordering some custom stuff. Language barrier is a big issue. Justin Wilson j2sw(a)mtin.net http://www.mtin.net Managed Services – xISP Solutions – Data Centers http://www.thebrotherswisp.com Podcast about xISP topics http://www.midwest-ix.com Peering – Transit – Internet Exchange On Feb 7, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> wrote: I will live vicariously though your experiences with them. I'm good on FiberStore. :-) Thanks for the feedback.. On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:27 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: Maybe, your experience was the pivotal event that became a turning point in their customer service attitudes... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:24:18 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Point taken on the specs.. Still doesn't excuse poor customer service and tech support. I never expect to be told that no refund will be issued when I am dissatisfied with the product. A request for RMA because something is not working as expected should not have to be escalated to the President of the company. Other than that I am sure FiberStore is a great company :-) On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:17 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: My point is...... ... The thing to rely on is/are the Specs. If the Specs are right or specs are wrong, that is what determines the product's mfg shortcoming (defect). Mfg. Engineers are people, just like you and me.... and people can make mistakes... Being an Engineer, when I ask someone to do the design work, I ask them to explain it, and this way I double check their work.... Yes Mfg. Engineers are known to F***up too. While it is expected to be disappointed when something does not work.. and having a bad taste for dealing with that mfg, claiming that all of that mfg products are bad is a whole different issue. I deal with FiberStore, my experience have been very different, when stuff purchased from them, did not meet the specs, they took it back no questions asked. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: More power to you .... I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... "Compared FiberStore to another Vendor"... It was pointed out to me long time ago.... when someone said.. "My Chevy is better than a Ford".... Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> To: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone  Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: Hi Enviado, I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover < 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared to other vendors. Thanks Kenneth On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> wrote: Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and pinging tests... What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution good? Thanks!!! Enviado via iPhone  Grupo Connectoway Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: Mike, I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín <mmg(a)transtelco.net> wrote: Hi Mike I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. Ekinops & Packetlight. On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> wrote: I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and have a distance limitation. What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52 656-257-1109* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica que cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está estrictamente prohibido.

1 0

Re: Low cost WDM gear
by Kenneth McRae 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

I will live vicariously though your experiences with them. I'm good on FiberStore. :-) Thanks for the feedback.. On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:27 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: Maybe, your experience was the pivotal event that became a turning point in their customer service attitudes... :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:24:18 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear Point taken on the specs.. Still doesn't excuse poor customer service and tech support. I never expect to be told that no refund will be issued when I am dissatisfied with the product. A request for RMA because something is not working as expected should not have to be escalated to the President of the company. Other than that I am sure FiberStore is a great company :-) On Feb 07, 2015, at 01:17 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: My point is...... ... The thing to rely on is/are the Specs. If the Specs are right or specs are wrong, that is what determines the product's mfg shortcoming (defect). Mfg. Engineers are people, just like you and me.... and people can make mistakes... Being an Engineer, when I ask someone to do the design work, I ask them to explain it, and this way I double check their work.... Yes Mfg. Engineers are known to F***up too. While it is expected to be disappointed when something does not work.. and having a bad taste for dealing with that mfg, claiming that all of that mfg products are bad is a whole different issue. I deal with FiberStore, my experience have been very different, when stuff purchased from them, did not meet the specs, they took it back no questions asked. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 4:01:29 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's true up to a point. Specs are only as good as the entity providing the data. I can tell you a few stories about specs and some MAJOR fails by a major network equipment manufacturer failing to meet advertised specs. When you engage the engineering folks to assist in a build, they should know the true specs of their gear better than anyone else. If they say for a certain distance that A+B will work, then that is exactly what I expect. That is pretty basic. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: More power to you .... I always get a chuckle out of statements such as ... "Compared FiberStore to another Vendor"... It was pointed out to me long time ago.... when someone said.. "My Chevy is better than a Ford".... Someone pointed out, hey, which Chevy ? the Chevette ? or the Corvette ? and Which Ford the Fiesta or Mustang ? Every mfg. has a lots and lots of products, and they are always getting improved... One has to pay attention to the specs.. even the same model products at different times don't have the same specs ! :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: Support(a)Snappytelecom.net From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> To: "Faisal Imtiaz" <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> Cc: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br>, "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:49:16 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear That's why I engage the engineering resources on their end to make sure the chosen candidate will support the use case. I have now performed an A/B comparison and the FiberStore gear is inferior. Excessive loss on the mux and optics. On Feb 07, 2015, at 12:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <faisal(a)snappytelecom.net> wrote: If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion loss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using anyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not meet specified specs. If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very very likely to be surprised in a bad way. :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> To: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux... Enviado via iPhone  Grupo Connectoway > Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: > > Hi Enviado, > > I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I > needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw > a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which > created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for > our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss > mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you > may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover < 60km. I also > notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when > compared to other vendors. > > Thanks > > Kenneth > >> On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo(a)1telecom.com.br> >> wrote: >> > >> Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when >> you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? >> I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test >> about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( >> only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with >> ssh and pinging tests... >> What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this >> solution good? >> Thanks!!! >> >> Enviado via iPhone  >> Grupo Connectoway >> >>> Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae(a)me.com> escreveu: >>> Mike, >>> I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware >>> equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive >>> loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without >>> threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI >>> equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). >>> On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín <mmg(a)transtelco.net> wrote: >>> Hi Mike >>> I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective >>> solutions. >>> Ekinops & Packetlight. >>> On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog(a)ics-il.net> wrote: >>> I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) >>> muxes >>> to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't >>> work >>> so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore >>> must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels >>> and >>> have a distance limitation. >>> What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> -- >>> TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: >>> *+52 >>> 656-257-1109* >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use >>> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >>> information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure >>> under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this >>> information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, >>> or >>> copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. >>> AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la >>> persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información >>> privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación >>> aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica >>> que >>> cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está >>> estrictamente prohibido.

2 1

Ixia or Spirent around?
by Jason Lixfeld 16 Apr '15

16 Apr '15

I tried the contact form on their respective websites a couple of weeks back, but have not heard back. If anyone from there is lurking about or if anyone has a sales contact that covers Toronto and could send me off-list, I'd be grateful. Thank you! Sent from my iPhone

1 0

reclaiming arin IP allocations?
by goemon＠anime.net 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

web.com/netsol is disavowing ownership of 209.17.115.109. NetRange: 209.17.112.0 - 209.17.127.255 CIDR: 209.17.112.0/20 NetName: WEB-COM-BLK3 NetHandle: NET-209-17-112-0-1 Parent: NET209 (NET-209-0-0-0-0) What is the process to get this netblock reclaimed? -Dan

7 11

Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco IOS XR Software BVI Routed Packet Denial of Service Vulnerability
by Cisco Systems Product Security Incident Response Team 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Cisco IOS XR Software BVI Routed Packet Denial of Service Vulnerability Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20150415-iosxr Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2015 April 15 16:00 UTC (GMT) Summary ======= A vulnerability in the packet-processing code of Cisco IOS XR Software for Cisco ASR 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers (ASR) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a lockup and eventual reload of a network processor chip and the line card that is processing traffic. Only Typhoon-based line cards on Cisco ASR 9000 Series Aggregation Services Routers are affected by this vulnerability. The vulnerability is due to improper processing of packets that are routed via the bridge-group virtual interface (BVI) when any of the following features are configured: Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF), policy-based routing (PBR), quality of service (QoS), or access control lists (ACLs). An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending IPv4 packets through an affected device that is configured to route them via the BVI interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause a lockup and eventual reload of a network processor chip and the line card that is processing traffic, leading to a denial of service (DoS) condition. Cisco has released free software updates that address this vulnerability. There are no workarounds to address this vulnerability. This advisory is available at the following link: http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-… -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVLoaBAAoJEIpI1I6i1Mx3QxoP/0l8Z+HfJhF5ipb0CZT62TIS m6gBR5TnXtkQTSLPBqvGTALoKTpXIuY49YwRjkAYRmVMei+ercsf6llE8YSmYL3Q TjaGxxhp4v9dQo36IwuzhjY8oGiMHIrLuRwWt+b8OZos2d+wQAcP76nfKyWhnGhC rBwN/js1uxBkTWpxIru149xf76moe3+1v353kjVS+PUbm33Uwe1dfAS1uETZvN1N lIIYlyzwqzokl+KRFvPKq0Iyr/qLa2cHqtfcLOwAD2VuLwGboFcno1uOlf7uEt4Z Wb1T1tAHvEHVBMpmh2jcV6EgGw3igU5Azx2C/+YeNqFTAei4qbUYi9Jhg9vuvhO1 ED5w+GaXg58opiaYEvP4GAXJ6pcq2P39Nawncodz/rA2IM5bQyTRWzCflMMfivFC AR0/g500NvwyCWluXaDVpvcZMI/MNuw8nq4MaTp7e/opYAiJFMW/ru6YAAFZOTW3 yG0Iij+vObL977hGlSHxlbJfqusfHT9m1tvARUhqRnD+LJcymvGMY9bJnndGqFr1 MQowrdz2acEX4DYF6RJgjgYSUfpH7QZd2Dh7STxmOS1y+8oUBplcr8oD4qgl/NRk NJyyuN2lLywb+v0EJGwz1+QjCBOLRJ5y3CvYM9ZsPOWJJZASDmPa4EvVQSyXloBM 8aItCdd34k/4H7gj+gYy =nnUg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: macomnet weird dns record
by Larry Sheldon 15 Apr '15

15 Apr '15

On 4/14/2015 08:51, Colin Johnston wrote: > Get real, why make is hard for others to debug abuse issues, another > reason why blocks in place as no technical cooperation. Because "others" has a subset = "dreaded anti-spammers". -- The unique Characteristics of System Administrators: The fact that they are infallible; and, The fact that they learn from their mistakes. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

1 0