May 2015 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Huawei and ZTE Routers
by Colton Conor 08 May '15

08 May '15

The other thread about the Alcatel-Lucent routers has been pleasantly delightful. Our organization used to believe that Juniper, Cisco, and Brocade were the only true vendors for carrier grade routing, but now we are going to throw Alcatel-Lucent into the mix. ZTE and Huawei, the big chinese vendors, have also been mentioned to us. I know there are large national security issues with using these vendors in the US, but I know Level3 and other large American vendors use Huawei and ZTE in their networks. How do their products perform? How are they compared to Cisco and Juniper on the performance side of the house? Is their pricing really half or less of that of Cisco and Juniper? Is it worth using these vendors or not worth the hassle?

5 4

Mailing list posts wrapped
by Andrew Koch 08 May '15

08 May '15

There was an inadvertent DMARC handling setting applied to all posts. This has been corrected. Sorry for the disruption. Andrew Koch

2 1

Alcatel-Lucent 7750 Service Router (SR)
by Colton Conor 08 May '15

08 May '15

I was wondering if anyone was using a Alcatel-Lucent 7750 Service Router (SR) in their network? How does this platform compare the the Cisco ASR, Brocade MLXe, and Juniper MX line?

15 27

Re:
by Ted Cooper 08 May '15

08 May '15

On 08/05/15 11:58, Mike Hammett via NANOG wrote: > I've seen the same over here and also considered it weird. It looks exactly like the the DMARC senders treatment - I think there's something wiggy and everyone is being treated as a DMARC encumbered sender.

2 2

Re:
by Christopher Morrow 08 May '15

08 May '15

List-Post: <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> From: Nathan Angelacos via NANOG <nanog(a)nanog.org> you are seeing the effect of whatever that new 'we will stop spam with dns records' process (not spf, not dkim ... the other one) On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Nathan Angelacos via NANOG <nanog(a)nanog.org> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Nathan Angelacos <nangel(a)tetrasec.net> > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Cc: > Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 22:04:05 -0400 > Subject: Re: Missing Subjects > Looks like there's an extra line break after this header line: > > X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP > > So the SMTP headers are getting partitioned. > >

1 0

Re:
by Joel Esler (jesler) 08 May '15

08 May '15

Seeing them here too. -- Joel Esler Sent from my iPhone On May 7, 2015, at 9:58 PM, Paul Ferguson via NANOG <nanog(a)nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote: <mime-attachment>

1 0

Re: Missing Subjects
by Nathan Angelacos 08 May '15

08 May '15

Looks like there's an extra line break after this header line: X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP So the SMTP headers are getting partitioned.

1 0

Re: Missing Subjects
by Nathan Angelacos 08 May '15

08 May '15

Looks like there's an extra line break after:

1 0

Re:
by Mike Hammett 08 May '15

08 May '15

I've seen the same over here and also considered it weird. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Ferguson via NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> To: "NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2015 8:56:44 PM

1 0

List hiccups?
by Paul Ferguson 08 May '15

08 May '15

1 0